• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

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

Del Zeppnile said:
Self defense is an affirmative defense and the burden of proof is on the defense to show clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's actions were reasonable. It is not enough to just claim that the situation was stressful or unfamiliar, he has to demonstrate that his use of deadly force was reasonable. "Reasonable" is not so broad a term as to be just what the defendant believes to be reasonable, but more narrow than that. And to the benefit of the defense the burden of proof is not even the same as the prosecution must demonstrate (beyond a reasonable doubt). All the defense needs to do is demonstrate clear and convincing evidence. In the Dunn case there was none of that.
Click to expand...
Not even a whiff.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Lord Tammerlain said:
He was so afraid for his life that he did not mention the incident to his SO, or call the police.

That is not the action of a man who was afraid for his life and shot at someone with justification. It is the action of someone who realized he just fd up.
Click to expand...

Your are assuming ....you simply don't know. Ever been in a situation like Dunn's?

It's encouraged and recommended that you *remove yourself from the *immediate danger area* of the scene of the *said* threat. Leaving the premises is not egregious, and easily able to be articulated plus no law was broken
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

ric27 said:
Your are assuming ....you simply don't know. Ever been in a situation like Dunn's?

It's encouraged and recommended that you *remove yourself from the *immediate danger area* of the scene of the *said* threat. Leaving the premises is not egregious, and easily able to be articulated plus no law was broken
Click to expand...

Other then of course shooting at people
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Leo said:
I cannot comment upon the laws which prevail in the various US jurisdictions, but under British Law your earlier statements were, in effect, correct.

A Barrister who is informed of guilt by his potential client has the duty to either refuse representation (and become a potential witness against the client) or to inform the court of his client's admitted guilt, while advising that client to make a guilty plea in the hope of a lesser sentence. He may not, at the risk of being disbarred, represent a client whom he knows to be guilty, as anything otherwise. A Barrister may also withdraw from a case where he feels ‘the administration of justice might be or appear to be prejudiced’.

So you see, we 'serfs and subjects' (as some Americans are wont to describe us) do some things rather better. :D

But the pachyderm in the chamber which everyone is ignoring - and which someone needs to mention (at the risk of the storm of vituperation such mention will doubtless bring,) - is the fact that none of this would have happened, and a 16 year old would be alive today, had Dunn not been allowed to carry a hand gun.
Click to expand...

Like your more sensible approach to enforcing ethics on attorneys :) Like our approach to the right to bear arms. It was, after all, a reaction to the private arms policies toward the colonies by British governance of the day that we came to recognize the right to bear arms. So, Dunn is your guy's fault :)
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

ric27 said:
Your are assuming ....you simply don't know. Ever been in a situation like Dunn's?

It's encouraged and recommended that you *remove yourself from the *immediate danger area* of the scene of the *said* threat. Leaving the premises is not egregious, and easily able to be articulated plus no law was broken
Click to expand...

Leaving the scene....not a big deal if you need to get to safety.

When you are safe, call 911 or drive to the nearest police station or officer.

Why would someone not take this reasonable action?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

ric27 said:
Your are assuming ....you simply don't know. Ever been in a situation like Dunn's?

It's encouraged and recommended that you *remove yourself from the *immediate danger area* of the scene of the *said* threat. Leaving the premises is not egregious, and easily able to be articulated plus no law was broken
Click to expand...

Get serious. No law was broken?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Lord Tammerlain said:
Other then of course shooting at people
Click to expand...

But he was able to articulate why he shot into a car full of people and why he drove far far far away and did not report his actions....so he is innocent, damn it!;)
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

AGENT J said:
Read more: Michael Dunn guilty on four counts, including attempted murder; mistrial declared on first-degree murder charge* - NY Daily News


Back-up links
Michael Dunn guilty on four counts, including attempted murder; mistrial declared on first-degree murder charge* - NY Daily News
Jury couldn't agree on first-degree murder in Dunn trial
Fla. man guilty of lesser counts in 'loud music' shooting | Fox News


Good riddance to that nut case, that thug will probably die in prison making the streets a safer place.
Click to expand...
I haven't been following this case. All I know is there was a guy who had an argument with some teens, a threat was made, he started firing and kept firing while they were driving away.

And now the media is saying "this will keep happening while we have Stand Your Ground laws".
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

ric27 said:
Your are assuming ....you simply don't know. Ever been in a situation like Dunn's?
Click to expand...
Yes, everyday.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

year2late said:
Leaving the scene....not a big deal if you need to get to safety.

When you are safe, call 911 or drive to the nearest police station or officer.

Why would someone not take this reasonable action?
Click to expand...
If they're drunk and want the alcohol to leave the system.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Del Zeppnile said:
Self defense is an affirmative defense and the burden of proof is on the defense to show clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's actions were reasonable. It is not enough to just claim that the situation was stressful or unfamiliar, he has to demonstrate that his use of deadly force was reasonable. "Reasonable" is not so broad a term as to be just what the defendant believes to be reasonable, but more narrow than that. And to the benefit of the defense the burden of proof is not even the same as the prosecution must demonstrate (beyond a reasonable doubt). All the defense needs to do is demonstrate clear and convincing evidence. In the Dunn case there was none of that.
Click to expand...
Wrong. :naughty

I know what an affirmative defense is and I provided the information for all to read.
All that is required in such a case is a showing, or as stated, a production of evidence to generate the Jury instruction.
Without such, the Jury instruction is not generated. Capisce?

That evidence can be "testimonial or physical", and "that evidence can be adduced through through cross examination of Government witnesses or produced after the close of the Government’s case in chief".
In this case it was adduced through his testimony.
Dunn taking the stand and stating he was in fear of his life and reacting to the perceived threat was sufficient.
How do we know it was sufficient and the burden met to generate the self defense Jury instruction? Because the instruction was generated. Capisce?



So again, since you stated something so absurd to what already has been shown to be required.
Try reading it this time.
Excon said:
UNDERSTANDING AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Code: 
[COLOR="#000000"]UNDERSTANDING AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

David Beneman
Maine CJA Resource Counsel
Levenson, Vickerson & Beneman
P.O. Box 465
Portland, ME 04112
...

I. Legal Groundwork For Affirmative Defenses

A. What is an Affirmative Defense?

An affirmative defense is one which provides a defense without negating an essential
element of the crime charge. [highlight][COLOR="#000000"]To establish an affirmative defense the defendant must place
before the jury sufficient proof [COLOR="#0000ff"][U][COLOR="#000000"]to generate a jury instruction[/COLOR][/U][/COLOR] on the particular defense theory
sought.[/COLOR][/highlight] Normally, an affirmative defense is expressly designated as affirmative by statute,
or is a defense involving an excuse or justification peculiarly within the knowledge of the
accused.

B.  How is an Affirmative Defense different from a “Regular” Defense?

[U]An affirmative defense is one which requires the actual production of evidence, [highlight][B][COLOR="#000000"]be
it testimonial or physical[/COLOR][/B][/highlight][/U]. [COLOR="#0000ff"][U][COLOR="#000000"]The evidence can be adduced through cross examination of
Government witnesses or produced after the close of the Government’s case in chief.[/COLOR][/U][/COLOR]
Affirmative defenses do not directly attack an element of the crime but provide either
justification for the conduct or some other legally recognized approach to undermining the
charge. A defendant must generate an affirmative defense instruction.


C. Types of Defenses

There are two categories of defense.
1. I did not do it defenses, and
2. I did it but defenses.
Affirmative defenses are available in both categories.


[...]


[B]D. Burdens[/B]
The term “affirmative defense” seems inextricably tied to arguments about burden shifting.
Three different burdens exist; 
[INDENT][COLOR="#0000ff"][U][COLOR="#000000"][B]burden of proof [/B](always on the government)[/COLOR][/U][/COLOR],
[B]burden of production[/B] (normally on the defense), and
[B]burden of persuasion[/B] (normally back on the government).[/INDENT]
The burden of proof to prove the essential elements of the crime charged BRD [highlight][COLOR="#000000"]starts with
and ALWAYS stays with the Government.[/COLOR][/highlight]
The burden of production to generate an affirmative defense is on the defense.
This is constitutional because the defense is not negating an essential element of the crime charged.
The standard, meaning the quantum of evidence needed, varies with the particular affirmative defense.
Generally it is either by a preponderance, or by clear and convincing. Once the defense has met this burden
of producing an affirmative defense, [COLOR="#0000ff"][U][COLOR="#000000"]the Government has the additional burden of [B]persuading[/B][/COLOR][/U][/COLOR] the jury
not just as to each element of the crime BRD, but also to persuade the jury to reject the affirmative defense BRD as well.

[INDENT][INDENT]I. [B]Burden of Proof[/B] Presenting an affirmative defense offers no relief to the government in what they must prove.
Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197 (1977). Rather, if the defense generates an affirmative defense,
[highlight][COLOR="#ff0000"][U][COLOR="#000000"]the government must then disprove the defense generally beyond a reasonable doubt.[/COLOR][/U][/COLOR][/highlight]
Mullaney, 421 U.S. at 704; U.S. v. Jackson, 569 F.2d 1003, 1008 n.12 (7th Cir. 1978)(emphasis added).
[/INDENT][/INDENT][/COLOR]

[URL="https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:06-_HilumfEJ:www.fd.org/pdf_lib/beneman_affirmative_defenses_materials.pdf+affirmative+defense&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjQQ9DDIG6I9rtWnkdrvG4XMpf-h2KGVxjIf2cgCnXgnZ6rKrFrnVZwDO3Pw-YkvR4VQt6w8d4k7Jd6u3XiNVni3HwMVJaz2xJgZswMP-HkNfqJhwe5jZwla03YrbDJEf3LwZ9D&sig=AHIEtbQjGQcnos5_jKrclWonXfetxH8Zuw"]Source[/URL]
Click to expand...
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
I know what an affirmative defense is and I provided the information for all to read.
All that is required in such a case is a showing, or as stated, a production of evidence to generate the Jury instruction.
Without such, the Jury instruction is not generated. Capisce?

That evidence can be "testimonial or physical", and "that evidence can be adduced through through cross examination of Government witnesses or produced after the close of the Government’s case in chief".
In this case it was adduced through his testimony.
Dunn taking the stand and stating he was in fear of his life and reacting to the perceived threat was sufficient.
How do we know it was sufficient and the burden met to generate the self defense Jury instruction? Because the instruction was generated. Capisce?
Click to expand...



Yeah, what I said. Dunn takes the stand and claims that he saw what he believed was a shotgun and that was his theory of self defense (affirmative defense) to the homicide for which he was charged with murder.

And since the affirmative defense puts the burden of proof on Dunn (and that will be considered by the jury as instructed by the judge), I guess his testimony did not carry the burden of proof with the trier of fact aka: the jury.

What part of the fact that Dunn's testimony was not sufficient to convince the jury do you not get?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Del Zeppnile said:
Yeah, what I said. Dunn takes the stand and claims that he saw what he believed was a shotgun and that was his theory of self defense (affirmative defense) to the homicide for which he was charged with murder.

And since the affirmative defense puts the burden of proof on Dunn (and that will be considered by the jury as instructed by the judge), I guess his testimony did not carry the burden of proof with the trier of fact aka: the jury.

What part of the fact that Dunn's testimony was not sufficient to convince the jury do you not get?
Click to expand...
No. It isn't what you said.
And you even have the burden confused, when I provided that information also.
You are just wrong all over.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
No. It isn't what you said.
And you even have the burden confused, when I provided that information also.
You are just wrong all over.
Click to expand...


Really I am wrong? So then if you are right and I am wrong, why was Dunn convicted of 3 counts of attempted murder?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Del Zeppnile said:
Really I am wrong? So then if you are right and I am wrong, why was Dunn convicted of 3 counts of attempted murder?
Click to expand...
D'oh!
:doh
Because what we are discussing has nothing to do with those charges.

The burden was on Dunn to make a showing to generate the instruction. That is all.


As for the why's of those three convictions?


This would be why.
“Each count has to, by law, be considered separately,” Healey said, adding that he realized, “It’s not easy to compartmentalize these things.”​

Considered separately, none of the other three had provoked his shooting, which, without question, endangered them.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
D'oh!
:doh
Because what we are discussing has nothing to do with those charges.

The burden was on Dunn to make a showing to generate the instruction. That is all.
Click to expand...

It was a desperate move and it failed. There was zero evidence supported that there was a weapon with the teenagers.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Del Zeppnile said:
It was a desperate move and it failed. There was zero evidence supported that there was a weapon with the teenagers.
Click to expand...
You are not making any sense here.
And you are wrong again.
There is evidence that there was a gun.
His testimony is evidence. And that is supported by circumstantial evidence that they tried to stash it.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
You are not making any sense here.
And you are wrong again.
There is evidence that there was a gun.
His testimony is evidence. And that is supported by circumstantial evidence that they tried to stash it.
Click to expand...

It is evidence that was given zero weight by the jury. Are you not aware of how this process works? The jury weighs the evidence and they gave no weight to that assertion by Dunn.

A defendant could take the stand and blame the killing on space aliens. Yes, that testimony would be "evidence", but evidence not worth the price of the Mrs O'Malley's cow's crap.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
Oy vey. His life was verbally threatened, that threat was then coupled with action making the threat to appear to be actual, the barrel on the window, then with his stating that it was "going down now" as he got out to carry through with the threat. That, to anybody, would appear to be a real threat. Under such circumstance the only one being an asshole and at fault for what happened, was Davis, not Dunn. Now, you do not have to believe that happened. But the prosecutor does have to prove it didn't. And she failed at doing so.
Click to expand...

Oy vey, the defendant CLAIMS his life was threatened- you seem to think that defendants don't lie to escape punishment.

There are no witnesses to back the claim of a threat, there are those who contradict it. Forensics doesn't back up the 'getting out' claim Dunn makes about the teens. Dunn was seen drinking prior to the event, fled the scene of a self defense shooting- who does that???!!!

The defense didn't claim SYG, a hearing for that was never requested by the defense. If a judge had heard the SYG defense and had agreed then there would have been no trial. THAT is how SYG works.

It comes down to was it traditional self defense and Dunn being overcharged with Murder 1.

And to be clear Dunn was NOT found not guilty of Murder 1, the jury deadlocked- far cry from the jury believing Dunn was facing a credible threat and was acting in self defense.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Del Zeppnile said:
It is evidence that was given zero weight by the jury. Are you not aware of how this process works? The jury weighs the evidence and they gave no weight to that assertion by Dunn.
Click to expand...
Clearly you do not have a clue as they did not return a verdict on the murder charge.
What he testified to, which was evidence, was considered and obviously was given weight.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
Clearly you do not have a clue as they did not return a verdict on the murder charge.
What he testified to, which was evidence, was considered and obviously was given weight.
Click to expand...

You don't know that to be a fact. Unless you have some interview by the jury that this was the reason for the hung verdict on the first degree murder charge, why are you claiming that? It would appear that the a few people on the jury were not convinced that Dunn was intent on killing, but I find it bizarre that the conceded that shooting 10 rounds into a vehicle could be attempted murder, but when one was killed was not murder.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

notquiteright said:
Oy vey, the defendant CLAIMS his life was threatened- you seem to think that defendants don't lie to escape punishment.
Click to expand...
You seem to think everybody lies to get out of being found guilty rather than speaking the truth. And that just doesn't sit well with the actual plea stats. No, most do not lie. Not even close to being a large number statistically speaking.

And our standards are innocent until proven guilty.
You have no evidence to suggest he is lying to even make the assertion in the first place.


notquiteright said:
There are no witnesses to back the claim of a threat,
Click to expand...
Doesn't need to be. The prosecution has to disprove his claim.


notquiteright said:
there are those who contradict it.
Click to expand...
There was no reliable or viable witness who did so.
The prosecution presented the Davis's friends. And those are not reliable viable witnesses.
Especially the driver with the felonies who was violating his curfew. Birds of a feather tent to flock together.
There is more than enough reason to suspect their accounts.
Their incredibility casts no doubt on Dunn's account.


notquiteright said:
Forensics doesn't back up the 'getting out' claim Dunn makes about the teens.
Click to expand...
Actually as pointed out in trial, it does.
But because the Doctor was not given that account, and actually told otherwise, her conclusions where formed around that which she was given. Garbage in, garbage out.


notquiteright said:
Dunn was seen drinking prior to the event,
Click to expand...
Matters not. No evidence suggests he was inebriated.
None.


notquiteright said:
fled the scene of a self defense shooting- who does that???!!!
Click to expand...
Anybody in fear would.
And as it wasn't a requirement that he stay, or contact the police, so really isn't something you can hold against him.


notquiteright said:
The defense didn't claim SYG, a hearing for that was never requested by the defense. If a judge had heard the SYG defense and had agreed then there would have been no trial. THAT is how SYG works.
Click to expand...
First of all. Self defense is part and parcel of the law as the immunity hearing is.
The decision not to have one before trial matters not.
He can still have one.


notquiteright said:
It comes down to was it traditional self defense and Dunn being overcharged with Murder 1.
Click to expand...
The traditional self defense you speak of is part and parcel of SYG and the immunity hearing read the law.
And in this case, the jury was asked to consider it in reaching a decision.
As for your stating it was an overcharge. Yes it clearly was, yet the Jury was unable to return a verdict on lesser included offenses.


notquiteright said:
And to be clear Dunn was NOT found not guilty of Murder 1, the jury deadlocked- far cry from the jury believing Dunn was facing a credible threat and was acting in self defense.
Click to expand...
To be clear nobody thinks he was found not guilty, so why you are speaking the obvious is unknown.
Nor is it an indication of one way or another.
For all we know, one or more believed he was acting in self defense and refused to go along with others wanting some sort of guilt finding.
Or, for all we know, it was one or more that wanted to find guilt when the others didn't.

For that information we have to wait until we hear from a juror.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Del Zeppnile said:
You don't know that to be a fact. Unless you have some interview by the jury that this was the reason for the hung verdict on the first degree murder charge, why are you claiming that? It would appear that the a few people on the jury were not convinced that Dunn was intent on killing, but I find it bizarre that the conceded that shooting 10 rounds into a vehicle could be attempted murder, but when one was killed was not murder.
Click to expand...
:doh
Yeah I pretty much do know that the jury coincided all the evidence and gave it weight they believed it deserved.
I also know that they did not return a verdict on the charge, or on any of it's lesser included offenses.
And some possibilities of why were previously mentioned, not just in the above.

As for what you say now about not finding "because", but returning the verdict they did, etc...
You are not considering that they had to make separate determinations in regards to those, separate from the murder charge.
So again. Those individuals (Davis's friends) did not do anything to invoke a deadly response from Dunn like Davis did. As such, by the evidence, the jury really had no choice but to find the way they did on those charges.
 
Last edited:
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

notquiteright said:
Oy vey, the defendant CLAIMS his life was threatened- you seem to think that defendants don't lie to escape punishment.

There are no witnesses to back the claim of a threat, there are those who contradict it. Forensics doesn't back up the 'getting out' claim Dunn makes about the teens. Dunn was seen drinking prior to the event, fled the scene of a self defense shooting- who does that???!!!

The defense didn't claim SYG, a hearing for that was never requested by the defense. If a judge had heard the SYG defense and had agreed then there would have been no trial. THAT is how SYG works.

It comes down to was it traditional self defense and Dunn being overcharged with Murder 1.

And to be clear Dunn was NOT found not guilty of Murder 1, the jury deadlocked- far cry from the jury believing Dunn was facing a credible threat and was acting in self defense.
Click to expand...

100% correct, there was factually no verdict and the charges are still present meaning he factually didnt walk.


THeres no facts or corroborating evidence that there was any threats or it was self defence. Theres no facts or corroborating evidence that there was a gun. Dunn was proven to be a liar on the stand and his credibility was shot. He's a thug and will probably, hopefully, die in prison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom