Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial[W:336] (1 Viewer)

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Thank you for those references. By no means do I claim any level of expertise in these matters, but as someone involved in the early stages of a degree in laws and jurisprudence, I have some awareness of the meaning of the terms testimony and evidence (as they apply within British and international law).

We both appear to understand the same thing with the term testimony, but perhaps there is a variation of understanding with the terms 'evidence', and 'testimonial evidence'.

Within the legal system with which I am familiar, simple testimony is not regarded as evidence per se. It becomes testimonial evidence when it contains elements that serve as a proof of the veracity of an assertion.

E.g: X is accused of a violent crime and asserts that he was not at that location but at the theatre. He quotes a minor mishap in the production not reported in the media. This testimony, when accepted by the court, serves as evidence of the truth of his statement, and serves as testimonial evidence (which differs from material, documentary, or circumstantial evidence).

But please be advised that I respect your right to different opinions upon these matters, and I have no intention of engaging in page long discussions with you. We are at a point where we must simply agree to disagree in a civil manner.

All this to say nothing different.
Go figure!


His account is evidence by itself.
His account is evidence, as to the hows and whys of his actions.
As the defendant, his account stands as is, unless disproved.
His account stands even if it is shown not to be justified.

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Should have done something else. Had every opportunity not to.

As the law does not require that he do anything else. It is a good thing the Jury hung.

His actions currently have him in jail for the rest of his "life"

Currently.
That may change. And there is a good possibility it may.

My guess is that the second shot at him will probably have him with a murder conviction.

Not if the Jury follows the law and the evidence.

He is toast.
He is probably being eyed to rush a prison fraternity as we speak. He should fit right in.

Irrelevant absurdity.

Oh good gracious.

Reasonable people do not shoot up a car filled with people then get pizza and watch a movie.

A sociopath, perhaps. Someone under the influence perhaps. A reasonable person? Not so much.

Oh good gracious. Is correct.
He was firing at the threat, not randomly shooting up some vehicle.
That is what reasonable people do. Unreasonable people on the other hand, instead, let the individual carry through with their threat to kill them.

---

I call bull****. That woman was so ****ed up in the head after this happened that she wouldn't even go into the hotel room at first. She was too scared. And if you read the transcripts, she said that he ordered the pizza for her, to see if it made her feel better. Now SHE? She was broken up. Not him. Her.

What? ??? On direct, she got of the vehicle first and went straight up to the room and changed cloths. On cross, she confirmed she ran up to the room.
So what are you referring to.


He felt she needed something to eat help calm her stomach.
She is the one who wanted pizza.
She is the one who called the front desk for the information to order pizza.
He is the one that placed the order for the pizza that she asked him to order.

So again: She asked him to order a pizza because she was hungry. Folks do have to eat you know.

His suggesting that she eat something really matters not. His suggestion, and her desire for pizza, was to calm her stomach.

---

They obtained all these info, pictures and crime scene evidence directly from the police and the DA's office through proper chain of custody.

And the information that he was shot while in the vehicle, yet were not given the shooters account of what happened.
Go figure.

When have we ever heard of the medical examiners taking anything relating to a crime from the average joe on the street or from family members or from the defense team? It's just a silly notion.

Nonsense. They are routinely given the defendants account to disprove it didn't happen that way.
It wasn't in this case.
That speaks of subterfuge on the part of the prosecutor.

For what the medical examine had, it is obvious that Davis was shot while sitting in the back seat.

Oy vey! :doh
From what she had is correct.
She made her conclusions fit the information she was given.

How else did the bullet trajectory entered his lower right side and ended up near the left shoulder just below the armpit?

Michael Dunn had to be laying on the ground to shoot upward towards Davis if he was standing.

And how did another bullet enter the right side of the thigh and ended up in the groin while another entered the lower left inner thigh to end up exiting the upper left outer thigh? Again, Michael Dunn would have to be laying down to get an upward diagonal trajectory.

The only way the bullets could trace those trajectory through the body was when Davis was in seated position and these also lined up with the bullet holes and their paths that passed through the door panel of the back passenger compartment as demonstrated by the long dowels.

The Doctor was clear that her conclusions were only drawn on that she was given. And that she was not given any alternate information by which to go by.
Had she, her conclusions may have been different.
And by what the defense suggests, Davis was diving back into the vehicle, putting his body horizontal when the bullets were fired.
Which is very plausible.

But since information wasn't given to her, and she could not consider it, which makes her conclusions are faulty.

All the elements and evidence are there for the medical examiner to make the conclusion. To say that she wasn't given all the information to consider ---- I call it bs.

Bs is her conclusions, because they were not based on all the information.

One thing the prosecution failed to do in Strolla's cross of the medical examiner was their failure to raise an objection when Strolla bashed her with a question "garbage in garbage out" that was purely meant to ridicule the medical examiner instead of posing a genuine question.

:lamo
It wasn't bashing. It emphasized the point that her conclusion was flawed for lack of information.

Also, Dunn himself stated that Jordan was advancing on him and that he apparently saw Dunn went for his weapon and dove back inside the SUV. By his own account alone he committed a cold blooded murder when the aggressor had already turned and retreated when he shot and kill Jordan not to mention his unleash of nine other rounds as the SUV was hurriedly retrieving.

:lamo
Wrong. A person taking cover to shoot, is still a threat to be eliminated.

 

[Cryptic]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Currently.
That may change. And there is a good possibility it may.

My rough guess is that under existing convictions, Dunn could walk in 10 years if:
A- The judge gives him the most favorable sentence possible (20 years for attempted murder, but all sentences, including firing into a vehicle are to be served consecutivly)
B- The parole board is extrremely favorable and approves him for parole after serving 50% of his sentence.

Of course the possibility of these things happening is remote.

 

[year2late]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Oh good gracious. Is correct.
He was firing at the threat, not randomly shooting up some vehicle.
That is what reasonable people do. Unreasonable people on the other hand, instead, let the individual carry through with their threat to kill them.
.

The threat of being killed by an imaginary gun.

The threat of being killed as they were driving off.

Seriously. Your unwavering belief in this man is just amzing.

You make like a jury has to believe his self defense story when all evidence points to it being a fabrication.

 

[dolphinocean]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

I gotta laugh at the desperate idea that the medical examiner was not given the shooter's account of what happened. The shooter's account was that the menacing looking Jordan and his buddy, Leblanc, were sitting at the back passenger seat exactly as the prosecution said they were. So, there was no argument about that info when the medical examiner was given that info by the prosecution and she based her finding of Jordan seated at the back passenger seat instead of the front seat or anywhere else when the bullets entered his body the way they did.

The only thing different the shooter claimed was that Jordan had got out of the Durango and coming at him when Dunn went for his gun. But that shooter's account had been addressed and knocked down by the medical examiner based on the physical evidence: plastic pieces of the door panel were found only inside the back of the Durango, Davis shot dead inside at his seat with the car door closed and the bullet trajectory based on the bullet holes and the direction of the long dowels through the door matched up and consistent with the bullet trajectory through Jordan's body with him seated and leaning away from the direction of firing. The bullet trajectory did not match up in any way whatsoever if Jordan was standing at the door when the bullets entered the door panel where he was standing. How the heck did the bullets ended up from the level of the door panel to his armpit below his left shoulder in a diagonally upward direction if he was standing and got hit?

If Jordan was diving back horizontally into the SUV when shot the bullet trajectory would have entered from the back and travel along the back of the spinal column and not in front that severed his aorta and punctured his lung. But, most likely the bullets would have not hit Jordan at all given the bullet paths as demonstrated by the dowels if the door was open.

It's just absurd.

All the medical examiner needed were the bullet holes in the Durango with the long dowels showing their paths, the bullet trajectory through Jordan's body and where Jordan was seated which was never in dispute by any person not even Dunn nor Strolla. If the bullet paths through the door panel were consistent with the bullet trajectory through Jordan's body in a seated position at the back seat location as described by the medical examiner and inconsistent with him standing at the door as the shooter claimed, then that's all there is to it.

So yes, the medical examination had included the shooter's account and found his claim wanting. Perhaps the medical examiner should have demonstrated with an exemplar of someone with Jordan's height and build standing at all possible various angles and at all possible ranges of door excursion with the wooden dowels imposed upon the body to show the three dumb and brain dead jurors how it's not possible for the bullet to make a upward turn at a door panel level and turning upward towards the left shoulder.

 

[Leo]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

All this to say nothing different.
Go figure!


His account is evidence by itself.
His account is evidence, as to the hows and whys of his actions.
As the defendant, his account stands as is, unless disproved.
His account stands even if it is shown not to be justified.

As you wish - but with what part of - I respect your right to different opinions upon these matters, but see no point in discussing it further - is presenting comprehension difficulties?

 

[dolphinocean]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Now, to claim that Jordan was diving back horizontally into the SUV when he was shot by Dunn, this clearly nailed Dunn for cold blooded murder by his own account which was claimed to be the "evidence". Not to mention he then unleashed several more bullets at a retrieving and fleeing vehicle with three other people inside. However you cut it, Dunn is guilty of murder, period.

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

The threat of being killed by an imaginary gun.

The threat of being killed as they were driving off.

Seriously. Your unwavering belief in this man is just amzing.

You make like a jury has to believe his self defense story when all evidence points to it being a fabrication.

Stop with the ridiculousness.
You can not show it to be imaginary.
The threat from him still exists whether or not the vehicle is in motion.
And nothing points to his account being a fabrication. Even Juror's believed him.

---

As you wish - but with what part of - I respect your right to different opinions upon these matters, but see no point in discussing it further - is presenting comprehension difficulties?

Apparently, if there is a comprehension problem, it is all yours.

There is absolutely no reason to think you are going to be allowed to muck things up with with your incomplete understanding.

The specific argument was over whether or not his account is evidence. Not over the type of evidence it is.

His account is evidence. Period.
It is also that which the prosecutor has to show isn't true, or in the alternative, wasn't justified.

---

Now, to claim that Jordan was diving back horizontally into the SUV when he was shot by Dunn, this clearly nailed Dunn for cold blooded murder by his own account which was claimed to be the "evidence". Not to mention he then unleashed several more bullets at a retrieving and fleeing vehicle with three other people inside. However you cut it, Dunn is guilty of murder, period.

Wrong.

Davis taking cover did not make him any less of a thereat.

---

So you finally attempted to actually address the discussion....wow. But too bad you still cant prove me wrong. So your claims of ridiculous are just that...unfounded.

You were the only one not addressing the arguments and the only one attributing to another that which they did not say.
If you wish to learn how to quote a person correctly ask, I am sure there are other that will help you. But you putting your reply in the quote box off what they said is misquoting them.

Regardless, everything you have said in reply has already been shown to be ridiculous.

 

[year2late]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Stop with the ridiculousness.
You can not show it to be imaginary.
The threat from him still exists whether or not the vehicle is in motion.
And nothing points to his account being a fabrication. Even Juror's believed him.

Yes, three jurors thought his story was plausible. 9 did not.

You are in the camp of "he said it, must be true". I am not that naïve.

Jurors do not have to believe a statement.

They can look at a variety of things to consideration.

If I were a juror I would want to know if there was any evidence of a shotgun in the car. If any of the boys (or family) owned one. I would first and foremost take into consideration that he did not report anything to the police in a reasonable time frame. He fled the scene and did not report. Left town the next day. Did he even tell his girlfriend about the gun?

There is no logical reason to believe that there was a shotgun there. There is certainly good reason to believe Dunn made up the story to pretend like his angry over-reaction was life or death -kill or be killed - self defense.

My gut says he was impaired with alcohol, had a bug up his butt about that kind of music anyway - including the type of person that would listen to it- and over-reacted - likely because of the alcohol impairment. There will be no proof of this because Dunn's actions made it impossible to investigate in a timely manner.

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Yes, three jurors thought his story was plausible. 9 did not.

You forgot to include Juror number eight.
You know, the one who indicate she believed he was acting in self defense up to the point of where he continued to fire.
She believed him yet wanted to convict anyways. As pointed out in the other thread, that is not following the law.
Heck, she even demonstrated a lack of understanding of some of the evidence. D'oh!
How many others were willing not to follow the law, and misunderstood the evidence?
Damn good thing the jury was hung.

You are in the camp of "he said it, must be true". I am not that naïve.

Apparently you are. Especially to even say such nonsense.
I am in the camp of the law, and in such a camp, to prove the elements necessary, his account must be disproved, and that has not happened.
And as such, his account stands as is.

Jurors do not have to believe a statement.

And so far, we have three that are assumed to believe his account, and another one who did, yet wanted to convict anyways.

They can look at a variety of things to consideration.

They may not hold against him that which he is not required to do. Which may explain why we have the above predicament.

If I were a juror I would want to know if there was any evidence of a shotgun in the car. If any of the boys (or family) owned one. I would first and foremost take into consideration that he did not report anything to the police in a reasonable time frame. He fled the scene and did not report. Left town the next day. Did he even tell his girlfriend about the gun?

None of which is required.
And all understandable given the traumatic experience.
As for the GF, she is emotionally unstable. Her not remembering means squat.

There is no logical reason to believe that there was a shotgun there.

Wrong.
He saw something. That something appeared to be a barrel of a shotgun.
The prosecution can not prove he didn't see one because of the actions of Davis's friends, which as seen buy a witness appeared to be "stashing".
And then instead of completing a call to police, the driver called his aunt, who later came into the area. Highly suspicious, and all circumstantial evidence that there was a gun which was stashed.

There is certainly good reason to believe Dunn made up the story to pretend like his angry over-reaction was life or death -kill or be killed - self defense.

No there isn't.
That is nothing more than the manifestations of an overly suspicious mind.
And as such, can't be proven.

My gut says he was impaired with alcohol, ...

Your gut?
iLOL
:lamo:lamo
Four small drinks over the length of time in question, for a man his size, says your gut is faulty.
Which really isn't anything new.

 

[year2late]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

You forgot to include Juror number eight.
You know, the one who indicate she believed he was acting in self defense up to the point of where he continued to fire.
She believed him yet wanted to convict anyways. As pointed out in the other thread, that is not following the law.
Heck, she even demonstrated a lack of understanding of some of the evidence. D'oh!
How many others were willing not to follow the law, and misunderstood the evidence?
Damn good thing the jury was hung.



Apparently you are. Especially to even say such nonsense.
I am in the camp of the law, and in such a camp, to prove the elements necessary, his account must be disproved, and that has not happened.
And as such, his account stands as is.


And so far, we have three that are assumed to believe his account, and another one who did, yet wanted to convict anyways.


They may not hold against him that which he is not required to do. Which may explain why we have the above predicament.


None of which is required.
And all understandable given the traumatic experience.
As for the GF, she is emotionally unstable. Her not remembering means squat.


Wrong.
He saw something. That something appeared to be a barrel of a shotgun.
The prosecution can not prove he didn't see one because of the actions of Davis's friends, which as seen buy a witness appeared to be "stashing".
And then instead of completing a call to police, the driver called his aunt, who later came into the area. Highly suspicious, and all circumstantial evidence that there was a gun which was stashed.


No there isn't.
That is nothing more than the manifestations of an overly suspicious mind.
And as such, can't be proven.



Your gut?
iLOL
:lamo:lamo
Four small drinks over the length of time in question, for a man his size, says your gut is faulty.
Which really isn't anything new.

Excon, Juror # 8 was expressing something plausible. If he had just stopped shooting when the car drove off, it was more in the realm of possibility to think it was about self defense. But that is not what occurred, is it?? He kept shooting into a vehicle filled with passengers. So that "realm of possibility" evaporated. Of course, a lot evaporated when he left the scene and never reported to the police what happened.

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon, Juror # 8 was expressing something plausible. If he had just stopped shooting when the car drove off, it was more in the realm of possibility to think it was about self defense. But that is not what occurred, is it?? He kept shooting into a vehicle filled with passengers. So that "realm of possibility" evaporated. Of course, a lot evaporated when he left the scene and never reported to the police what happened.

That is not what she indicated.

You need to listen to what she actually said. Not what is printed.
She was not following the law.

It was self defense until that point.

 

[year2late]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

That is not what she indicated.

Did you question her about what she meant?

I can actually see if he just stopped shooting when the car drove off (and called the police immediatly) that self defense was at least a possibility . But that is not what happened. he kept shooting and failed to report.

Idle curiosity, did you see any inconsistencies in Micheal Dunn's interrogation an testimony?

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Did you question her about what she meant?

It is clear as day, and so is the fact that she wasn't following the law.

he kept shooting and failed to report.

He kept shooting at a threat that had stopped directly behind his vehicle.
Which then began moving again. And until it was out of the vicinity, it was still a threat.

And he is not required to report anything.

Idle curiosity, did you see any inconsistencies in Micheal Dunn's interrogation an testimony?

Play your games elsewhere.

There are folks saying he lied. Not only that he lied, but that it has been proven. And that just ain't so.
Those claims are nothing more than their own suspicious mind at work.

Just like your claims of there is (no reason to believe) or about his GF stating otherwise.
It is all made up crap from suspicious minds.



What is sad is that she is being slammed for saying it wasn't racial.

 

[reinoe]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Play your games elsewhere.

Can you tell me about any inconsistencies you saw in Dunn's testimony?

 

[year2late]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

So, did Dunn have inconsistencies in his stories (in testimony, interrogation, etc)?

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Can you tell me about any inconsistencies you saw in Dunn's testimony?

Play your games elsewhere.

There are folks saying he lied. Not only that he lied, but that it has been proven. And that just ain't so.
Those claims are nothing more than their own suspicious mind at work.

Just like your claims of there is (no reason to believe) or about his GF stating otherwise.
It is all made up crap from suspicious minds.

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

So, did Dunn have inconsistencies in his stories (in testimony, interrogation, etc)?

Have you been able to show any proven lies yet?

 

[reinoe]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Play your games elsewhere.

There are folks saying he lied. Not only that he lied, but that it has been proven. And that just ain't so.
Those claims are nothing more than their own suspicious mind at work.

Just like your claims of there is (no reason to believe) or about his GF stating otherwise.
It is all made up crap from suspicious minds.

View attachment 67162661
We seem to have struck a nerve.

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

View attachment 67162661

 

[Kreton]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

This guy deserves to rot in prison. Sucks they didn't get him on all counts, but they got enough to lock his sorry ass up for the rest of his life.

 

[reinoe]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Not at all
It is your claims that have to be substantiated.
And as of yet, you have failed.

When did Dunn contact the police?

 

[Tettsuo]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

:lamo
Not at all.
It is your claims that have to be substantiated.
And as of yet, you have failed.

Was there a shotgun in the truck? That was Dunn's claim wasn't it? It was the claim of the other young men that survived, that there wasn't a shotgun.

Who was correct?

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

When did Dunn contact the police?

You need to substantiate your claim first.

 

[Excon]

Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Was there a shotgun in the truck? That was Dunn's claim wasn't it? It was the claim of the other young men that survived, that there wasn't a shotgun.

Who was correct?

Really?
You ask this?
Have you not been paying attention?
Have you not even read the replies made specifically to you?


You already know that the circumstantial evidence suggests that there was one that was stashed.