Page 21 of 36 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 355

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

  1. #201
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    do not be dishonest and cut off the quote. I said excon believes. that is your thoughts and what you think not you.
    Holy ****! Apparently you do not know the difference. You were discussing me. Cutting off the rest was not dishonest. You were discussing me.
    The rest mattered not to the point that you were discussing me.
    That is not permitted.
    Try to at least learn something here.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    he didn't according to the evidence submitted by the prosecution and the testimony of all witnesses including dunn himself.
    Totally incorrect and therefore wrong.
    She presented no reliable evidence to the contrary.

    But since you think she did, what is it you think she presented?


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    yes you have because you have yet to present anything that backs up any argument you have made here other than dunn said. which is well not an argument.
    No I haven't ignored anything, which has nothing with what you are saying now. Which is still inexplicable, as I do not need to present anything other than the evidence as it is. Do you really not realize that?


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    ad hominen irrelevant to a debate.
    Incorrect. What you said does not exist in reality, so they were nothing more than the manifestations of your imagination.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    there was no gun. so that has been disproven. if you say there was a gun prove it by something other than what dunn "claimed".
    Wrong. I do not need to provided any other evidence other than his account.
    Dunn claimed there was a gun, and that has not been disproved as required. Whether you like it or not, that is the way it works.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    wrong. he has to supply enough evidence to make himself believable.
    No he doesn't. It is the prosecution that must show he didn't.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    in fact he saw what he appeared to be a barrel that doesn't make it a gun.
    No it doesn't. Even I had said so previously.
    But to him, it was. And that is really what matters here.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    the fact he didn't tell his g/f that there was a gun.
    Her, an obviously emotionally disturbed person, not remembering, doesn't mean he didn't tell her.
    Two; Nor is he required.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    none of the kids in the car said they had a gun and no gun was found.
    I see you did not understand what reliable evidence meant.
    Davis's friends came off as unbelievable and their credibility was shot.

    And as previously stated, their actions after the shooting of not calling 911 but getting out and being seen by a witness in what appeared to be stashing something, in connection with the driver calling his aunt instead, and her then coming into the area and the police not searching for four days, all leads to the possibility that the gun actually existed and was stashed.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    And because of Davis's friends actions, and that of a witness that saw one of them in what appeared to be stashing something, coupled with the driver calling his aunt instead of completing a call to 911, and her then coming into the area, and the police not looking until days later, you have all the makings that the gun really did exist and was stashed. And that is what you are ignoring as it has been pointed out several times now.
    that is what they claimed of course they were probably ducking because they were being shot at. so again non-reliable testimony that would cause them to be shot at.
    no you don't prove it.
    ??? You are speaking nonsense as to what you quoted.
    Nothing I said goes to them ducking. ???
    Nothing I said goes to them being in the same vehicle as the threat that was being shot at. ???
    You are speaking nonsense.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Why are you so confused about this?
    No one said she lied. It was said that her conclusions were based on faulty information. Do you really not understand that?
    Garbage in, garbage out.
    prove it. if you can't prove it with anything other than dunn said then you can't prove it therefore her information is accurate. do you not understand that. the arguments in a debate are much higher than a defense. if you want to make an assertion that this is a fact then you have to be able to supply the evidence to prove it.
    if you can't then your point is invalid.
    Wow! You are apparently becoming distracted by something.
    Prove it by something other than what Dunn said? Wow! Simply wow!

    The specificity was pointed out in trial.
    She did not have all the information to draw her conclusions. You keep getting told this, yet you continually ignore the realty of it.
    It was pointed out in trial. What do you not understand about that?


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    prove with anything other than what dunn said happened since his story is well crap and he couldn't even tell it straight the 2nd time.
    More imaginative bs from.
    Dispute his account with actual evidence and not your imagination.
    They did during the trial which is why the majority of jury members found him guilty of murder they just couldn't convince the others.
    Now you are just taking your imaginative crap to a new level.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    wrong. is the only thing you can say because you can't back up any of your statements.
    Yes you are qwrong as usual.
    My statements have been backed up.
    It is your imaginative ones that have not, nor can they ever be.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  2. #202
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

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

    Continued from above.

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    I have present the evidence as known. I need not provided anything other than that.
    Do you really not understand that?
    No you have presented what 1 guy said. a debate has a much higher call of evidence than so and so said so you are wrong.
    Your demonstrated ignorance of what has been presented, the law, reality, and the meaning of it, is astounding.

    His account is evidence. Period.
    And that evidence is what needs to be disproved beyond a reasonable doubt. Period.

    It didn't happen in regards to the murder charge.
    And they really had no choice in reference to the other charges, as Davis's friends did not provoke any of the shooting.
    And as the Juror indicated in reference to the murder charge, it was because she and others believed he had other choices, not because he didn't actually see a gun.
    And what she indicates flies in the face of the law.

    So you have absolutely nothing in regards to your arguments.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Two wanted acquittal from the start.
    One came around to that viewpoint.
    A very major accomplishment when the weight and resources of the state are brought down upon a person.
    not really still means that 9 people found him guilty of murder.
    Oy vey! Yes it really was an accomplishment.
    And two, it does not mean that at all.
    And as already pointed out, what that juror indicated the jury was thinking (that he could of done something else) flies n the face of the law. The law says you do not have to do something else.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    yes they were. they didn't believe his self defense story. that is following the law. you assume because someone goes he threatened me he gets off.
    that isn't how it works. reasonable force is required. someone cussing at you is not enough to invoke deadly force no matter where you are at.
    Now you are again showing that you do not know what you are talking about.
    Rad the law and then listen to what she said.
    You are way off base.
    Luckily for him though that hse said what she did so he can correct that misconception the second time around and have the Judge stress, that under the law, he does not have to do anything else and is entitled to stand his ground.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    yea because he was guilty something you claim he wasn't.
    Wrong again.
    He wasn't found guilty of murder. Has he?
    No he hasn't.
    Go figure.
    And I never said he wasn't found guilty of the other charges. Have I?
    Well golly. No I haven't.
    I have even stated why he was.

    But as said, if he is found not guilty of the murder charge, as in acquitted. He has more than a good chance at having the other charges tossed.
    Which is a hell of a lot different that the crap you are attributing to me.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    no he shot 9 times 3 or 4 of the bullets didn't hit anywhere near davis they hit the front passenger door. davis was in the back. the next 3 shot hit davis and killed him.

    the next 3 shots hit the back of the car and one almost hit the driver in the back of the head.
    Yes. All of them were in the direction of the threat.
    And he did a good job at it as he hit the threat.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    kind hard to say you are in self defense mode when the kid can't get out of the car and is shot sitting down.
    And that conclusion was disputed and shown to be based on faulty information.
    You can't get around that.
    As per the trial: Garbage in, garbage out.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  3. #203
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,784

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

    Im so happy Dunn will never have real freedom again!!!


    next inches of shotgun he will see will be going in his tailpipe!


    http://abcnews.go.com/US/father-slai...y?id=22588955#
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #204
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    If there was a gun, Dunn's actions after the shooting has led to his being convicted

    Had he stayed and reported the shooting, the police would have come and then would have searched for the gun right away.

    Since no gun was found, his claims of self defense dropped as a valid viewpoint in the jurors minds leading to his conviction.

    That of course is if a shot gun was actually there of course.
    The juror did not say that.
    To the murder charge, she said they (those who wanted to convict) believed he should have done something else.
    That would be them not following the law.

    To the attempted murder charges and firing into the vehicle.

    "Valerie said all the jurors felt Dunn crossed a line when he continued to fire at the SUV as it fled the scene in Jacksonville. In their minds, any threat Dunn may have felt before had passed."
    Last edited by Excon; 02-20-14 at 02:23 AM.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #205
    Professor
    Leo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 02:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,674

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

    There are two facts which appear self-evident to me.

    There was no evidence of a firearm being present in the car at which Dunn opened fire.

    Dunn's testimony was not evidence in the sense of being the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

    Nor was it evidence in the legal sense of being information drawn from personal testimony, a document, or a material object, used to establish facts in a legal investigation or admissible as testimony in a court of law. It was merely his testimony, it established no fact.

    I take no position other than stating these as self-evident facts.
    I hate the idea of causes, and if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country. E.M. Forster

  6. #206
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:56 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,603

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

    excon is wrong.

    why is excon wrong? simply because he accepts what the defendant says as truth.
    He ignores the fact that there was no gun found and no one other than dunn saw a gun or found a gun.
    He ignores and claims the medical examiner submitted faulty information which is a crime in and of itself and would cost her not only her job but probably prison time.
    when asked to support this claim he can't.

    He ignores that even dunn said that he was parked close enough that it would be impossible for dunn to get out of the car let along pull a shot gun out with him.
    he ignores that the first 3 shots fired weren't at dunn at all but at the front passenger where dunn wasn't even at.
    He ignores that dunn was shot in the car falling away from the door simply because he thinks that the medical examiner ignores what the defense says.
    even though it has been proven to him that the medical examiner along with forensic testing has shown that davis was in the car and sitting down.
    He ignores the fact that dunn continues to fire at the kids as they move away no longer a threat and almost his the driver in the head with his random firing.

    His next claims are even more ridiculous saying that the jury ignores the law simply because they don't believes dunns self defense story. which means that the prosecution submitted enough evidence to support that. at least 9 of the jury members thought that there was enough evidence to not support a self defense claim.

    What excon is wrong about is that you simply cannot state there is a threat and shoot someone. self defense more so SYG take a bit more to prove.
    the majority of the jury following the law and the evidence present didn't find enough reasonable doubt. unfortuantly 2 of the other juror's decided that cussing at someone is enough.

    hopefully the next jury will have more sensible people on it and convict this guy of murder.
    there actually has to be some kind of evidence other than your word to convince a jury that is what happened.
    9 of the jury members say that Dunn did not act reasonable in that situation and that is following the law.

    that is why excon is wrong and will continuously be wrong.
    the only argument that excon can make is that is what dunn said so he is right and everyone else that doesn't think that way is wrong.
    this why we have a jury that weighs the evidence and the claims.

    there will be another trial and this guy is getting 60 years at least for attempted murder. in a way davis did get justice as this guy won't see day light for a while. he will probably die in prison as it is.

  7. #207
    Sage



    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,215

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo View Post
    There are two facts which appear self-evident to me.

    There was no evidence of a firearm being present in the car at which Dunn opened fire.

    Dunn's testimony was not evidence in the sense of being the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

    Nor was it evidence in the legal sense of being information drawn from personal testimony, a document, or a material object, used to establish facts in a legal investigation or admissible as testimony in a court of law. It was merely his testimony, it established no fact.

    I take no position other than stating these as self-evident facts.
    Very important points.

    Testimony as evidence has to show it's value. The testimony had no value (except perhaps a negative one) because nothing else pointed to him being truthful.

  8. #208
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo View Post
    There are two facts which appear self-evident to me.

    There was no evidence of a firearm being present in the car at which Dunn opened fire.
    And?
    The circumstantial evidence suggests it was stashed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Leo View Post
    Dunn's testimony was not evidence in the sense of being the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

    Nor was it evidence in the legal sense of being information drawn from personal testimony, a document, or a material object, used to establish facts in a legal investigation or admissible as testimony in a court of law. It was merely his testimony, it established no fact.
    Dunn's account is evidence. Period.
    And is evidence in the legal sense, as it is called testimonial evidence. And establishes the fact of his account, which in this case the Prosecution must disprove, or in the alternative, show wasn't justified.

    If not disproved, it stands as what happened. Which apparently most folks arguing this topic do not seem understand.
    Then the only alternative is to show it wasn't justified.




    Testimony

    Oral evidence offered by a competent witness under oath, which is used to establish some fact or set of facts.

    testimony legal definition of testimony. testimony synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.



    testimonial evidence
    Oral or written assertion offered in a court as a proof of the truth of what is being stated. It includes testimony and hearsay evidence.


    What is testimonial evidence? definition and meaning
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  9. #209
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

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

    Quote Originally Posted by year2late View Post
    The testimony had no value (except perhaps a negative one) because nothing else pointed to him being truthful.
    The prosecution has to prove to twelve people what he said didn't happen. She failed.
    At least three people believed his account as to why he was shooting.
    And as the Juror who spoke out said, she and others wanted to find him guilty because he could have done something else.
    Not because he wasn't responding to a threat. Which, if accurate, is not in accord with the law.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  10. #210
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    excon is wrong.
    No, you are, as usual.
    You really need to learn the law before speaking again.
    Your claims are based in your own biased imagination and are not true.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    that is why excon is wrong and will continuously be wrong.

    No. The following is why you are wrong and will continue to be wrong.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    why is excon wrong? simply because he accepts what the defendant says as truth.
    Wrong.
    His account stands as there is nothing reliable to contradict it. Do you not know that difference?
    And it is that account that needs to be disproved by the Prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    He ignores the fact that there was no gun found and no one other than dunn saw a gun or found a gun.
    Wrong.
    Stating that it didn't need to be, is not ignoring it.
    Stating that the circumstantial evidence supports that it did exist, is not ignoring it.
    So stop with the untruths.
    You on the other hand, do ignore the circumstantial evidence.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    He ignores that even dunn said that he was parked close enough that it would be impossible for dunn to get out of the car let along pull a shot gun out with him.
    Wrong.
    I haven't ignored it.
    It is you who keeps ignoring the answer.

    First of all, the distance was tight for the bigger (Dunn) and car door making it impossible for him to get out.
    That does not mean it was impossible for the smaller person (Davis) to get out, especially as their respective doors were different and Davis's door was further to the rear.

    Dunn was then able to get out after the other vehicle started moving away.

    So what is it you do not understand about these things.
    Is it that you do not understand simple physics. Or is it that you have this incorrect view of how things happened?


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    he ignores that the first 3 shots fired weren't at dunn at all but at the front passenger where dunn wasn't even at.

    Oh boy, you again show that you do not even know the evidence.

    Well you are wrong again, and, as usual.
    The first three shots were the ones right into the rear door.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    He ignores the fact that dunn continues to fire at the kids as they move away no longer a threat and almost his the driver in the head with his random firing.
    Wrong.
    You again are the one ignoring what has been repeatedly said.
    I have addressed this on a few fronts.
    One was in regards to the future. And for some reason, that to you, is ignoring it. Not!
    Another was in regards to the Jury not being able to come to any other conclusion because Davis's friends did nothing to provoke Dunn's firing. And for some reason, that to you, is ignoring it. Not!

    And the other was my addressing it in the following manner.

    Davis was still a threat regardless if the vehicle was moving away.
    Davis was not driving, that means that he could be firing at any moment. Whether you realize it or not, under such circumstances, that person would still be a threat.

    And Dunn could not see if the threat was preparing to fire or not because of the tint. So hell yes Davis was still a threat until the vehicle got a significant distance away.
    Especially as the vehicle was still in close proximity. Or didn't you realize that?

    And for some reason, that to you, is ignoring it. D'oh!
    You clearly have repeatedly demonstrated that you do not know what the word ignore means.


    And btw, it was not random firing as you ridiculously and falsely assert. He pointed the weapon at the threat. He even hit the threat he pointed at. Duh!


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    His next claims are even more ridiculous saying that the jury ignores the law simply because they don't believes dunns self defense story.
    Wrong.
    You are misstating what was said by me and by the juror.
    My statement is based on what is reported she said.
    If what she said is accurate, then they were not following the law in regards to their believing he could have done something else.
    Under the law is wasn't required to do anything else, and as such, that is not following the law.

    And as previously said, this is great information for the defense to know, as instruction can be given during the next trial to make sure they remain within the law when reaching a decision.

    Your not understanding the above, is what is ridiculous.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    at least 9 of the jury members thought that there was enough evidence to not support a self defense claim.
    That is not what the Juror said.
    She said it was because they believed he had other options. Not because of any disbelief in his account or lack of evidence.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    What excon is wrong about is that you simply cannot state there is a threat and shoot someone. self defense more so SYG take a bit more to prove.
    Wrong.
    I clearly state otherwise. So again stop being untruthful.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    the majority of the jury following the law and the evidence present didn't find enough reasonable doubt. unfortuantly 2 of the other juror's decided that cussing at someone is enough.
    One; That was not the reason stated by the juror.
    Two; Your second comment is idiotically absurd as it is not in accord with the evidence.


    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    9 of the jury members say that Dunn did not act reasonable in that situation and that is following the law.
    iLOL No one said any such thing.
    This is nothing more that you reading into their failure to reach a decisions what you want to to read.
    Or in other words (because I know you need it explained), nothing but your imagination.



    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    the only argument that excon can make is that is what dunn said so he is right and everyone else that doesn't think that way is wrong.
    As shown, you are the one how is wrong.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

Page 21 of 36 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •