Posted on 02/15/2014 3:24:49 PM PST by libstripper
urors in the trial of a white Florida man who fatally shot a black teenager over loud music said on their fourth day of mulling the case that they reached a verdict on four of five counts, but cannot come to a consensus on one count of first-degree murder.
Michael Dunn, 47, says he was acting in self-defense when he shot at an SUV 10 times while parked next to four teens at a Jacksonville, Fla., gas station in November 2012.
The shots killed Jordan Davis, 17, of Marietta, Ga. Dunn is charged with first-degree murder, three counts of attempted murder and one count of firing a deadly missile into an occupied vehicle.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
He had to go back to his cr and get his gun from the glove box. All he had to do was get in his car and move away from the noise. Man was not only stupid he is guilty as charged. State will retry him on the murder one count
His problem was he spoke to his girlfriend and the cops after the shooting and didn't mention that he saw a gun. After he spoke to his lawyer, he mentioned the gun for the first time. The prosecution ripped him up for that. (That's an idiot of a lawyer, BTW.)
Dunn was stuck with the evidence actually presented and it damned him. Prudence was the better part of valor that night and he chose not to be prudent by seeking fate instead of waiting for it to seek him, a terrible, stupid thing to do when armed. He’ll spend the rest of a very miserable life paying for that stupidity.
He should have called the cops, not run, and refused to say anything to anybody until he was represented by counsel.
Yep - lots of stupid gun owners with immature personalities out there. I consider it my responsibility to stay out of any kind of spat that might escalate - arguing opens the door to being "dissed", which too many consider to be "just cause". I'm willing to be dissed and take verbal abuse if it means a situation won't escalate to a physical confrontation.
right...good point.
In my CCW class I learned that. It would be hard for me to do, instinct is to talk..and the instructor also told us, we should already have an atty at the ready BEFORE anything ever happens and have his number on our cell phone.
Reminder to self: follow through with this tomorrow and get an atty. to have ready ( why do people get good advice and then not follow through...ha)
That may be so, but it's irrelevant here.
The victim was shot through the door of the SUV.
The medical examiner testified the victim was seated in the back seat, leaning away from the door, when he was shot.
There are four bullet holes through the front middle of the victim's door, right about where a passenger's knees would be. Two of the holes show a distinct downward trajectory.
The shooter gave inconsistent statements, first saying the victim was in the SUV and later saying the victim exited the SUV.
Since Dunn initiated the altercation then if someone did get out of the car then wouldn't that be in self defense?
Disturbing whose peace? There were a number of people in that gas station. Only Dunn saw the need to shoot someone because the radio was too loud.
Shooting them is a somewhat extreme way of doing that. You're a pretty sick puppy.
Gotcha. Only boomboxers playing music you don’t like are subject to death for subsequent acquittal of the shooter.
LOL. And you’re the one calling others names. Hilarious.
No, you were not advocating teaching anyone manners, you were calling for acquittal based on the fact that you did not like them or their evil music.
I didn’t say hat, you did. You attack people with innuendo and ridicule and then say I am calling others names. Really?
I didn’t say it was good or bad, just a comment. FR had always been very conservative meeting place with a strong, all be it still conservative, libertarian bent. That has certainly changed over the last few years. The divergence seen here would not be tolerated on the left. Just maybe that tolerance will be used against a very fine site. Much like the left and communist, in general, are trying to use America’s constitution to destroy it. JMHO
I believe Mr. Dunn is going to a place he so richly deserves.
Ok so now we can have a discussion about it. I said I would vote for acquittal. Based upon what i saw in the article the man is not guilty of murder. I base that on belief about his probable mental state. I don’t know what happened in the incident and unless you were there you don’t either. I suspect the shooter just snapped. As to whether or not I liked the victims I don’t know them. But I would say being injured or losing one’s life over something like this is tragic. Manners would go a long way to preventing or eliminating incidences of this type. As to the music I don’t what music was being played. But my experience is the louder the the music the more vile it is. Rape, murder, sex, theft and obscenity, yes I call that music evil. It helps drive a culture that is violent, angry, destructive, and ready to do harm at the drop of a hat for any slight real or imagined. I call that evil.
Well, you did use the word ‘dolt’, did you not?
But on an anonymous Internet forum that’s just kind of amusing, calling folks names. Water off a duck’s back.
The kid was shot and killed. You suggested you’d vote for acquittal and the only thing you noted in that post was the boomboxers and their evil loud music. I absolutlely did ridicule that notion by carrying it to its illogical extreme. Guilty as charged. I’d probably do it again if responding to a similar argument.
Dunn, from his gf’s testimony, had consumed 3 or 4 drinks at the wedding. Might he have had more? I wonder what his BAC was at the time of the shooting. I wonder if he was subject to a DUI. I wonder if his impulse control was where it might have been without drinking. Obviously, all speculation. This is where you and I seem to have some common ground, his state of mind. But we do very different things with it.
I think he was impaired by alcohol and lost his ability to control himself. You think he was pushed over the edge by loud evil music.
You’re right, neither of us was there. My interpretation of the minimal evidence we have in front of us is different from your interpretation. Seems the jury differed from you as well.
This never looked like 1st degree to me. Just a guy with a snoot full who let his emotions get the best of him. JMO.
“Disturbing the peace” is not the same as “hearing other people’s music”.
Put another way, you do not have the absolute right to go through life never being confronted with anything that disturbs you in any way, no matter how much you think your “peace” is being “disturbed”.
You will have to put up with hearing music you don’t like, seeing messages on t-shirts that bother you, seeing people doing things that annoy you. ON the bright side, you have the right to play music that others don’t like, to wear t-shirts that others will disagree with, and to do things that might annoy other people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.