• 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

ludin said:
do not be dishonest and cut off the quote. I said excon believes. that is your thoughts and what you think not you.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
he didn't according to the evidence submitted by the prosecution and the testimony of all witnesses including dunn himself.
Click to expand...
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?


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?


ludin said:
ad hominen irrelevant to a debate.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. What you said does not exist in reality, so they were nothing more than the manifestations of your imagination.


ludin said:
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".
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
wrong. he has to supply enough evidence to make himself believable.
Click to expand...
No he doesn't. It is the prosecution that must show he didn't.


ludin said:
in fact he saw what he appeared to be a barrel that doesn't make it a gun.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. Even I had said so previously.
But to him, it was. And that is really what matters here.


ludin said:
the fact he didn't tell his g/f that there was a gun.
Click to expand...
Her, an obviously emotionally disturbed person, not remembering, doesn't mean he didn't tell her.
Two; Nor is he required.


ludin said:
none of the kids in the car said they had a gun and no gun was found.
Click to expand...
I see you did not understand what reliable evidence meant. :doh
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.


ludin said:
Excon said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
??? 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.


ludin said:
Excon said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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?


ludin said:
Excon said:
ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
More imaginative bs from.
Dispute his account with actual evidence and not your imagination.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
Now you are just taking your imaginative crap to a new level.


ludin said:
wrong. is the only thing you can say because you can't back up any of your statements.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Continued from above.

ludin said:
Excon said:
I have present the evidence as known. I need not provided anything other than that.
Do you really not understand that?
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
Excon said:
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.
Click to expand...
not really still means that 9 people found him guilty of murder.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
yea because he was guilty something you claim he wasn't.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yes. All of them were in the direction of the threat.
And he did a good job at it as he hit the threat.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Im so happy Dunn will never have real freedom again!!!
:2party:

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


[video]http://abcnews.go.com/US/father-slain-teen-jordan-davis-visit-michael-dunn/story?id=22588955#[/video]
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Lord Tammerlain said:
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.
Click to expand...
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:
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.
 
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.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Leo said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Leo said:
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.
Click to expand...
And?
The circumstantial evidence suggests it was stashed.


Leo said:
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.
Click to expand...
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​
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

year2late said:
The testimony had no value (except perhaps a negative one) because nothing else pointed to him being truthful.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

ludin said:
excon is wrong.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
that is why excon is wrong and will continuously be wrong.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No. The following is why you are wrong and will continue to be wrong.


ludin said:
why is excon wrong? simply because he accepts what the defendant says as truth.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
He ignores the fact that there was no gun found and no one other than dunn saw a gun or found a gun.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
:doh
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.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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!


ludin said:
His next claims are even more ridiculous saying that the jury ignores the law simply because they don't believes dunns self defense story.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
at least 9 of the jury members thought that there was enough evidence to not support a self defense claim.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
I clearly state otherwise. So again stop being untruthful.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.


ludin said:
9 of the jury members say that Dunn did not act reasonable in that situation and that is following the law.
Click to expand...
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.



ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
As shown, you are the one how is wrong.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

And because these ridiculous quotes need a separate response.

ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
You know exactly what is being spoke about. The Doctors testimony. I do not need to provide that which you already know.
You asking for something you already know is nothing but a deflection from your being wrong.
Even she said she was not given that information so she could not consider it when making her conclusion.


ludin said:
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.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
It is clear that you do not understand what the word ignore means.
Pointing out that her conclusion is flawed because she wasn't given all the information to consider, is not ignoring it, but is putting it into proper perspective as flawed.

You can start @ 1:18:15 to listen to the cross examination.


Listen to her say she wasn't given all the information. Only the information given to her by law enforcement.
Listen to her say she was only operating under that information.

And once you are done listening to it all, smack your forehead for trying to argue the crap you have in regards to this.
She didn't have the information to come to a proper conclusion.

Conclusions reached that do not consider all available information, are faulty.

Had she had it, she could have, but she didn't.
She even said she would consider it if it was given to her.

So really, smack your forehead like this. :slapme:
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

year2late said:
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.
Click to expand...

exactly which is why 9 of the people on the jury voted to convict him of murder.
we will see what the next jury says.

either way this guy is still going away for a long time.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
That isn't what happened.

And of interest to your absurd statement: Our society does not allow anybody to violate the privacy of another's space with ear rumbling, car shaking music.
His politely asking them to turn down the music, was in accord with societal values. Davis's reaction to that was not.
Click to expand...

As a BTW, Florida has a noise ordinance law and the driver could have been ticketed. At the same time making noise, using profanity, failure to use turning signals, driving in the carpool lane, parking in the handicapped parking space or a variety of infractions that can get you ticketed by the police does not authorize drunks with guns to legally kill you.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Smeagol said:
As a BTW, Florida has a noise ordinance law and the driver could have been ticketed. At the same time making noise, using profanity, failure to use turning signals, driving in the carpool lane, parking in the handicapped parking space or a variety of infractions that can get you ticketed by the police does not authorize drunks with guns to legally kill you.
Click to expand...
Your attempt at presenting false information is noted as well as lame.
He killed a person who was threatening his life.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
Your attempt at presenting false information is noted as well as lame.
He killed a person who was threatening his life.
Click to expand...

Not according to the jury, the body that is charged with the responsibility of determining guilt or innocence. At present time and until the a new jury renders a verdict its his word against the State of Florida, multiple witnesses and his own girlfriend. As a BTW, one of the jurors from the first trial has come forward and said 9 of the 12 jurors determined he was guilty of murder.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Smeagol said:
Not according to the jury, the body that is charged with the responsibility of determining guilt or innocence. At present time and until the a new jury renders a verdict its his word against the State of Florida, multiple witnesses and his own girlfriend. As a BTW, one of the jurors from the first trial has come forward and said 9 of the 12 jurors determined he was guilty of murder.
Click to expand...
Yes even according to the jury you are asserting false information. There was no evidence of him being a drunk or actually being drunk that day.
You were asserting false bs.
And, had you bothered to pay attention to what that juror actually said, it was that they believed he could have done something else.
Not because they didn't believe his account.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
And?
The circumstantial evidence suggests it was stashed.
Click to expand...

I regret that I have not read every word written in the media about this case, and I have not encountered that circumstantial evidence. Would you be so kind as to quote it?

Excon said:
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​
Click to expand...

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

Leo said:
I regret that I have not read every word written in the media about this case, and I have not encountered that circumstantial evidence. Would you be so kind as to quote it?



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. :)
Click to expand...
Very well said. But, it's going to be a lost cause to one who keeps insisting that Dunn's statement is the evidence in the sense of it being a proven fact beyond all doubt while dismissing the other three surviving victims' opposing account and other neutral witness' account as not believable even though their material accounts were pretty much consistent with impartial witness account while Dunn not only lied but perjured himself while under oath taken before the judge and jury.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

The notion that Dunn politely told the kids to turn down the music as if it's a proven fact is laughable. The idea that he was the one who was trying to deescalate things while Jordan Davis was the one out of control is even more funny considering Dunn's demeanor in the trial video of him taking the stand and being crossed examined by John Guy. He was like trying to suppress a volcano within him while Guy was simply doing his job as a prosecutor in his murder case. I mean, if that guy got his hand on a gun he could have shot Guy right in the face between his eyes for a few good close shots he had with the Durango.

So, on Dunn's so-called gentle and polite demeanor that night I call bs on that.

Also, the medical examiners can only receive crime scene evidence and other information from the police investigators and the prosecution's office. The medical examiners don't go out to the crime scene and interview the shooting victims and witnesses to find out whether Jordan Davis was sitting in the front seat or back seat. Witnesses saw Davis friend sitting in the back seat crying uncontrollably while clutching Jordan Davis' dying body before they lay him down to the floor for resuscitation. The medical examiners don't go around collecting shell casings or go examine the bullet holes in the Durango. They obtained all these info, pictures and crime scene evidence directly from the police and the DA's office through proper chain of custody.

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.

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

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.

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

Excon said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

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

My guess is that the second shot at him will probably have him with a murder conviction. But frankly - icing on the cake. He is toast. He is probably being eyed to rush a prison fraternity as we speak. He should fit right in.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

dolphinocean said:
The notion that Dunn politely told the kids to turn down the music as if it's a proven fact is laughable. The idea that he was the one who was trying to deescalate things while Jordan Davis was the one out of control is even more funny considering Dunn's demeanor in the trial video of him taking the stand and being crossed examined by John Guy. He was like trying to suppress a volcano within him while Guy was simply doing his job as a prosecutor in his murder case. I mean, if that guy got his hand on a gun he could have shot Guy right in the face between his eyes for a few good close shots he had with the Durango.

So, on Dunn's so-called gentle and polite demeanor that night I call bs on that.

Also, the medical examiners can only receive crime scene evidence and other information from the police investigators and the prosecution's office. The medical examiners don't go out to the crime scene and interview the shooting victims and witnesses to find out whether Jordan Davis was sitting in the front seat or back seat. Witnesses saw Davis friend sitting in the back seat crying uncontrollably while clutching Jordan Davis' dying body before they lay him down to the floor for resuscitation. The medical examiners don't go around collecting shell casings or go examine the bullet holes in the Durango. They obtained all these info, pictures and crime scene evidence directly from the police and the DA's office through proper chain of custody.

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.

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

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.

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.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I snicker at the thought of him "politely" asking them to turn down the music.:lol:
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

dolphinocean said:
The notion that Dunn politely told the kids to turn down the music as if it's a proven fact is laughable.
Click to expand...
Right!:lamo

Both sides state this is what happened.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

year2late said:
Should have done something else. Had every opportunity not to.

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

My guess is that the second shot at him will probably have him with a murder conviction. But frankly - icing on the cake. He is toast. He is probably being eyed to rush a prison fraternity as we speak. He should fit right in.
Click to expand...

according to one of the jury members 2 of the members had already made up their mind which would have resulted in a mistrial anyway. they managed to convince one other but the other 9 didn't go for it.

there is enough evidence to suggest that dunn was not only not reasonable in his actions but negligent when it came to shooting his gun.
other than dunn said his life was threatened there is no evidence to suggest that he was in any danger. the evidence we have conflicts with his testimony.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

year2late said:
I have to admit, I snicker at the thought of him "politely" asking them to turn down the music.:lol:
Click to expand...
I snicker at the thought of Davis suddenly turned into an uncontrollable blood-thirsty killer that night. After all, I'm sure like most hot-headed teenagers, he would be having a lengthy history of threatening and killing tons of other teens in high school for the usual teenage quarrel and confrontation. And after all, that night they were planning for a good time cruising the mall for girls and thinking a shotgun on the floor of a tight back compartment was a very good idea to set the girls in romantic mood. It's absurd.

He said they scowled at him but he turned away not paying no attention, rolled up his window and faced straight.That's because a confrontation was the last thing he was looking for. Yeah right.

Jordan Davis saying: "I should f-ing KILL that m-f" and his polite "Excuse me - are you talking about me?" ----too sanitized. I call it bs.

Jordan Davis coming at him with a 10 or 20 gauge shotgun saying "You're dead, bitch! This thing is going down now!" and he went to glove compartment to get his gun, put a bullet in the chamber and still have time to make a very polite and dramatic declarative line "You are not going to kill me you son of a bitch". It's ridiculous ----this bs never happened.

John Guy should have asked him on the stand when he acted out under cross: "Is this the way you behaved on that night or worst?"
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

ludin said:
according to one of the jury members 2 of the members had already made up their mind which would have resulted in a mistrial anyway. they managed to convince one other but the other 9 didn't go for it.

there is enough evidence to suggest that dunn was not only not reasonable in his actions but negligent when it came to shooting his gun.
other than dunn said his life was threatened there is no evidence to suggest that he was in any danger. the evidence we have conflicts with his testimony.
Click to expand...
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.
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom