Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ansel12; All
I see a big problem here in that Dunn did not contact the police right after the shooting.

The police tend to take the first people reporting as the “victim”. Dunn had a lot to consider. There was no body or vehicle to even show that there was a shooting. If he involves the police, he is likely to miss his son's wedding. He does not even know if anyone has been hit.

He should have reported it, to get his side on the record, even if it made him late for the wedding, because criminals often make up stories that put them in the best possible light.

Jordan's friends in the SUV had lots of time to consider their story, and plenty of motive to come up with a good one and to sanitize the scene to their advantage.

They had the whole Trayvon Martin episode to act as an example of what they should concoct.

47 posted on 11/28/2012 5:53:39 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: marktwain; ansel12; umgud; wideawake
In my opinion, Dunn will probably be spending the next several decades as a guest of the state. This shooting, as I said in an earlier post, has no similarities at all with the Trayvon/Zimmerman incident. The shooting of Trayvon Martin was, based on the evidence, possessive of sufficient facets for a good attorney to argue that it was viable self-defense. Actually one wouldn't even need a good attorney ...an average one would do. The only reason for a good attorney would be to mitigate against the bias-effect stemming from media coverage of that case.

This incident, however, is not in any way similar to the Trayvon/Zimmerman shooting. The shooter fired 8-9 times into an occupied vehicle, claiming that he did so because he felt threatened. Well, he needs to prove that he had a sufficient reason to feel threatened, because so far it looks like there was an argument (with expletives and threats most probably) and things got out of hand, and his response was to settle a verbal argument with gunfire. All that is coming out so far is his lawyer is claiming it was 'self defense' (and per the several articles I've read saying nothing more, with one saying there were negative comments about the Zimmerman case). Was there a gun in the other car? There could have been an RPG-7 with a miniaturized thermobaric warhead, but without evidence of its presence it was never there.

As it stands, even without the media getting involved, this man shot at a highschool kid because of an argument over loud music. Even without any extraneous 'acceleration' that is quite damming. Throw in the media coming in on the tailends of the Trayvon/Zimmerman case, with the same prosecutor, and this man is finished.

Add to this that he left the scene, which would make sense if he was leaving (as he claims ...or was it some FReeper here) to avoid the chance that the people in the car were 'thugs' and more thugs would be coming. That would have made sense ...had he left to go straight to a police station and report what happened. However, that's not what he did, was it? He leaves and goes to a motel. His number is jotted down by witnesses. Witnesses who saw a shooting where the shooter appears to have fled the scene (and I use 'appears' loosely since it does seem that he actually fled the scene). And he only turns himself up when the story hits the evening news, with a chance that witness descriptions of the shooter/vehicle came up. Also not good.

The only way this guy is avoiding prison time is if CCTV shows the occupants of the other vehicle brandishing a weapon. Somehow I doubt such evidence will come up, and I also doubt it happened that way. This was probably a 'nice person' who was having a bad day and events just pushed him over the edge, and he responded in a manner that I believe he wishes he didn't. Unfortunately in the eyes of the law he killed someone over what appears to be verbal disagreement due to loud music.

Completely dissimilar to the Trayvon/Zimmerman case, and to be honest I would say that prosecutors pray for such cases because they are open and shut for the most part. Unless some CCTV evidence comes out this man will be spending a lot of time warming up to Bubba and Tyrone.

Bottom line: Without evidence to the contrary, what you have here is a person who shot at a car based on a verbal argument. This is different from the Zimmerman case, and different from the other case of the black lady who shot a white man that was attacking her car. In both of those cases a good lawyer can mount an effective defense. In this case? I hope he is a praying man, because only a veritable miracle would have a chance of saving him. This is a prosecutor's dream case.

49 posted on 11/28/2012 8:31:04 AM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain
Dunn had a lot to consider. There was no body or vehicle to even show that there was a shooting. If he involves the police, he is likely to miss his son's wedding.

Get real. This isn't a cheesy 1970s made for TV movie.

60 posted on 11/28/2012 10:12:54 AM PST by ansel12 (The only Senate seat GOP pick up was the Palin endorsed Deb Fischer's successful run in Nebraska)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson