• 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!

Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial[W:292]

Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Good day for justice, the jury was spot on!!

You just can't go killing someone because you were dissed, and you don't like the volume of someone's music, i sincerely hope prison is a nightmare in hell for this POS...

In society we have to face consequences of our actions, isn't that what those conservative freaks preach? i guess in their twisted sick minds, whites can just go around shooting unarmed Black men because it makes em feel good??
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Here's your quote:

That quote is wrong, so I gave you this answer:

"The jury decided on his guilt. A judge can't do that in a trial." And that is correct. Running a courtroom and judging a trial is not deciding guilt or innocence.

Should probably make a new thread to carry on this important debate.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Good day for justice, the jury was spot on!!

You just can't go killing someone because you were dissed, and you don't like the volume of someone's music, i sincerely hope prison is a nightmare in hell for this POS...

In society we have to face consequences of our actions, isn't that what those conservative freaks preach? i guess in their twisted sick minds, whites can just go around shooting unarmed Black men because it makes em feel good??

Spare me the histronics:

Most conservatives here would have convicted him of a crime (manslaughter or Murder 2). Also, most conservatives here realize that the biggest lethal threat to black teenagers are other black teenagers- something that Holder, BO and CNN just cant grasp.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Spare me the histronics:

Most conservatives here would have convicted him of a crime (manslaughter or Murder 2). Also, most conservatives here realize that the biggest lethal threat to black teenagers are other black teenagers- something that Holder, BO and CNN just cant grasp.

The same applied to all races.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Unless I've got it wrong, this verdict is pretty much irrelevant unless the death penalty comes into play. Based on his previous convictions, he was never getting out of prison.

It's semantics. It's ink for the papers. It gets people riled up and talking, which is good for business for some.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial
Michael Dunn found guilty of murder in loud-music trial - CNN.com

Sad day for him. He should have walked.

Just reading about it, seems the guy went a bit overboard. I did think that the remarks afterward referencing the Trayvon Martin case were stupid and didn't apply. Seems like there was no gun issue, I didn't see anything about him not having the right to have the gun.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Good day for justice, the jury was spot on!!

You just can't go killing someone because you were dissed, and you don't like the volume of someone's music, i sincerely hope prison is a nightmare in hell for this POS...

In society we have to face consequences of our actions, isn't that what those conservative freaks preach? i guess in their twisted sick minds, whites can just go around shooting unarmed Black men because it makes em feel good??

They should apply that to all the murders in Chicago. I wonder why there is so much attention on this case, when it's an everyday occurrence in Chicago?
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

They should apply that to all the murders in Chicago. I wonder why there is so much attention on this case, when it's an everyday occurrence in Chicago?
Spare me the BS, about Chicago, Chicago had not a damn thing to do with this occurrence or trial..

Rednecks in Texas kill each other, just like blacks kill other blacks in Chicago...
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

How does 1st degree surprise you? Nobody in the SUV was armed. Moreover, they were fleeing - so Dunn shot unarmed kids in the back. If Dunn said that there was a gun, then clearly he was lying and the jury thought so too.

Is that the new deal with shootings? They are all shot in the back, even when they were not.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial
Michael Dunn found guilty of murder in loud-music trial - CNN.com

Sad day for him. He should have walked.

Well even more good news to come out of a really stupid and tragic incident. I do agree "he should have walked"... Right away from the car with loud music and stfu. He might have still had a life if he had done so.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Who cares. His life is over.

Yes it IS over. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

I don't agree with 1st degree murder, but he definitely should have been convicted of something. The case clearly wasn't self defense.

Actually, I agree 100% with the verdict. He shot the guy with malice of forethought. That is first degree murder.

NOTE: Had the music been anything by Justin Bieber, I think stand your ground might have applied here. :mrgreen:
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Actually, I agree 100% with the verdict. He shot the guy with malice of forethought. That is first degree murder.

NOTE: Had the music been anything by Justin Bieber, I think stand your ground might have applied here. :mrgreen:

From what I read it didn't sound premeditated to me. I don't think it meets the legal definition of murder 1.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Yes it IS over. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Something says this isn't the first time this guy has used his gun to bully others.
Most normal people don't shoot up a car full of teens then drive to a motel to have a peaceful night of pizza and a movie.

What a walking pile of cow manure. Good riddance.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Something says this isn't the first time this guy has used his gun to bully others.

Now that you mention it, Dunn was strongly suspected of assaulting two street preachers because he found their presence outside a bar to be annoying. The police stopped the investigation when one of the preachers could not ID Dunn and the other, though able to identify him, dropped the charges.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

That's not what the judge and jury decided.
And? You think don't think people know what being found guilty means?
That's odd.


And just like in case where a not guilty verdict is returned and folks say (That doesn't mean he didn't do it.)
The same applies here. Being found guilty doesn't mean he did it.


He shouldn't have shot and killed that young man.
You can believe that nonsense all you want. But that young man was threatening to kill and pointed an object at him that he believed was a gun.
Under those circumstances that young man deserved what he got.





No it's really a great day for US and for those who think allowing stupid people to carry around guns is a very stupid idea.

Dunn will of course just melt right in with the skin heads.
While you obvious agree with the verdict, your opinion about it is wrong.
It is a sad day for him, just like I stated.





Why do you think he should walk?
Because he saw the person point something at him which he thought was a gun and was accompanied by threats to kill.
His fear was real and reasonable given the circumstances.

Not to mention that there was no real premeditation.





Good day for justice, the jury was spot on!!

You just can't go killing someone because you were dissed,
He didn't kill anyone because of any dissing.
The thug threatened to kill him and pointing an object that appeared to be a gun at him.
Anybody should be entitled to fire under those circumstances.





He got what he deserved.
:lamo
No he didn't. He should have walked.





Justice has been done to a murderer.
The justice system worked it's course. The verdict was wrong.





Well even more good news to come out of a really stupid and tragic incident. I do agree "he should have walked"... Right away from the car with loud music and stfu. He might have still had a life if he had done so.
If that is the way you want to look at it then, the good news from all of this is the thug who was threatening his life was killed. :lamo





Actually, I agree 100% with the verdict. He shot the guy with malice of forethought. That is first degree murder.
:doh
Then you do not know what malice aforethought means.
He shot in fear of his life in defense of himself. That is reaction to a threat, not malice or premeditation.





but he definitely should have been convicted of something. The case clearly wasn't self defense.
It was a case of self defense.
The individual threatened to kill him and pointed something at him which appeared to be a gun.
Anybody should be entitled to fire under those circumstances.
Funny thing here is that the tripod/stand was found under the seat yet nobody suggested that a leg of that is what he could have pointed at him through the window.





He already had over 60 years (minimum) coming on the prior convictions. It is nice to know that one cannot be preemptively executed because someone thinks that they might have had a gun.
See answer below.


Unless I've got it wrong, this verdict is pretty much irrelevant unless the death penalty comes into play. Based on his previous convictions, he was never getting out of prison.
Had his firing been determined to have been justified this time around, those previous conviction stood a good change at being overturned.

You can't tell a person they are justified in shooting at a perceived threat only to turn around and hold them culpable for other crimes while justly shooting at that very threat.

Alas, "had" is neither here nor there now.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

And? You think don't think people know what being found guilty means?
That's odd.


And just like in case where a not guilty verdict is returned and folks say (That doesn't mean he didn't do it.)
The same applies here. Being found guilty doesn't mean he did it.



You can believe that nonsense all you want. But that young man was threatening to kill and pointed an object at him that he believed was a gun.
Under those circumstances that young man deserved what he got.





While you obvious agree with the verdict, your opinion about it is wrong.
It is a sad day for him, just like I stated.





Because he saw the person point something at him which he thought was a gun and was accompanied by threats to kill.
His fear was real and reasonable given the circumstances.

Not to mention that there was no real premeditation.





He didn't kill anyone because of any dissing.
The thug threatened to kill him and pointing an object that appeared to be a gun at him.
Anybody should be entitled to fire under those circumstances.





:lamo
No he didn't. He should have walked.





The justice system worked it's course. The verdict was wrong.





If that is the way you want to look at it then, the good news from all of this is the thug who was threatening his life was killed. :lamo





:doh
Then you do not know what malice aforethought means.
He shot in fear of his life in defense of himself. That is reaction to a threat, not malice or premeditation.






It was a case of self defense.
The individual threatened to kill him and pointed something at him which appeared to be a gun.
Anybody should be entitled to fire under those circumstances.
Funny thing here is that the tripod/stand was found under the seat yet nobody suggested that a leg of that is what he could have pointed at him through the window.





See answer below.


Had his firing been determined to have been justified this time around, those previous conviction stood a good change at being overturned.

You can't tell a person they are justified in shooting at a perceived threat only to turn around and hold them culpable for other crimes while justly shooting at that very threat.

Alas, "had" is neither here nor there now.

The jury sat through all the testimony that was given in the trial, and all 12 jurors agreed unanimously that there WAS malice of forethought, but I forget. You can sit in your chair at your computer, without ever having stepped into that courtroom and say that I don't know what I am talking about. I DO know what I am talking about because I took the jury's word for it. After all, they were there, I wasn't. And your claim of fear for his life is laughable. After all, he had a gun, they were unarmed. And they didn't even try to get out of the car. He fired into it. Jesus H. Christ on a crutch. Do you actually believe the BS you are posting here? Freaking incredible.

Yea, this WAS first degree murder, and the good part of this is that this POS will not have another opportunity to shoot an unarmed black man for the rest of his pathetic life, which will probably be pretty damn short if he is not kept in solitary confinement for the duration of his sentence. Serves him right. May he rot, and after he dies, may he rot in hell.
 
Last edited:
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

From what I read it didn't sound premeditated to me. I don't think it meets the legal definition of murder 1.
Premeditation can occur in the split second before the trigger is pulled.
It speaks to thought process not time.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

The jury sat through all the testimony that was given in the trial, and all 12 jurors agreed unanimously that there WAS malice of forethought,
And they were wrong. Juries and Jurors get things wrong all the time.
Some do so purposely. Are you not aware of that?


I DO know what I am talking about because I took the jury's word for it.
:doh:lamo:doh
You accepting what the Jury did or did not do, is irrelevant to you actually knowing what you are talking about.
What you engaged in is called mimicking, or didn't you know that?


And your claim of fear for his life is laughable.
No evidence showed he wasn't in fear.
And he certainly was as demonstrated by grab his firearm in self-defense.


After all, he had a gun, they were unarmed.
:naughty
No. No weapon was found but they had plenty of opportunity to get rid of any that they had.


And they didn't even try to get out of the car. He fired into it. Jesus H. Christ on a crutch. Do you actually believe the BS you are posting here? Freaking incredible.
:doh
Freaking incredible is correct. The young man did get out of the car and dove back in. You clearly don't know the evidence, so you should just stop spouting this embarrassing nonsense.


Yea, this WAS first degree murder,
No it really wasn't.


and the good part of this is ...
The good thing about this is that the thug is dead and will not be able to threaten anyone else.


May he rot, and after he dies, may he rot in hell.
iLOL Ain't gonna happen. iLOL
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

And? You think don't think people know what being found guilty means?
That's odd.


And just like in case where a not guilty verdict is returned and folks say (That doesn't mean he didn't do it.)
The same applies here. Being found guilty doesn't mean he did it.



You can believe that nonsense all you want. But that young man was threatening to kill and pointed an object at him that he believed was a gun.
Under those circumstances that young man deserved what he got.





While you obvious agree with the verdict, your opinion about it is wrong.
It is a sad day for him, just like I stated.





Because he saw the person point something at him which he thought was a gun and was accompanied by threats to kill.
His fear was real and reasonable given the circumstances.

Not to mention that there was no real premeditation.





He didn't kill anyone because of any dissing.
The thug threatened to kill him and pointing an object that appeared to be a gun at him.
Anybody should be entitled to fire under those circumstances.





:lamo
No he didn't. He should have walked.





The justice system worked it's course. The verdict was wrong.





If that is the way you want to look at it then, the good news from all of this is the thug who was threatening his life was killed. :lamo





:doh
Then you do not know what malice aforethought means.
He shot in fear of his life in defense of himself. That is reaction to a threat, not malice or premeditation.





It was a case of self defense.
The individual threatened to kill him and pointed something at him which appeared to be a gun.
Anybody should be entitled to fire under those circumstances.
Funny thing here is that the tripod/stand was found under the seat yet nobody suggested that a leg of that is what he could have pointed at him through the window.





See answer below.


Had his firing been determined to have been justified this time around, those previous conviction stood a good change at being overturned.

You can't tell a person they are justified in shooting at a perceived threat only to turn around and hold them culpable for other crimes while justly shooting at that very threat.

Alas, "had" is neither here nor there now.
Bottom line ...
A murdering, gun crazy, racist, bullying, scumbag THUG will spend the rest of his life rotting away in prison, with no chance of parole.
Unarmed black teens are just a little bit safer because of that.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Bottom line ...
A murdering, gun crazy, racist, bullying, scumbag THUG will spend the rest of his life rotting away in prison, with no chance of parole.
Unarmed black teens are just a little bit safer because of that.
:lamo
Wrong. An innocent man will be doing time for a crime he did not commit. And the community is a lot safer with the real thug having killed.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Spare me the BS, about Chicago, Chicago had not a damn thing to do with this occurrence or trial..

Rednecks in Texas kill each other, just like blacks kill other blacks in Chicago...

Oh, it's just BS in Chicago? Thanks for clearing that up, I thought it was multiple murders.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

:lamo
Wrong. An innocent man will be doing time for a crime he did not commit. And the community is a lot safer with the real thug having killed.

Ya can't call him innocent anymore excon...
He is a convicted 1st degree murderer.
The real THUG pulled the trigger that night and now justice has been served.
 
Back
Top Bottom