Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial
:doh Said the one who was shown to be engaged in such.
And your assertion has not been proven by the evidence.
If he shot Davis when the latter was standing outside the boy would have been dead on the ground and there would have been blood on the ground but he died in the car so once again you have been exposed.
You are talking nonsense.
Who said he hit him outside of the car?
All you are doing is showing you do not know the evidence.
As presented during the first trial Davis immediately dove into the vehicle when he saw Dunn's gun, and Dunn began firing.
Which explains the angle of entrance of the wounds.
Stop talking about **** you do not know.
so once again you have been exposed.
:lamo
Said the one exposed telling the untruths.
So you do not know how to discern what is credible and what isn't. Figures.
The friends accounts are not credible.
From your link.
Both Thompson and Brunson said that it was Davis who escalated the verbal sparring. The teens told the court that they never heard Dunn curse or yell at Davis.
Credible as nothing shows it to be untrue.
So why do you think they never heard such? How about because Dunn wasn't acting out anger, spite, or disrespect which would have caused him to act in such a manner.
Dunn wasn't acting because he felt disrespected as those who can not know or even understand the evidence claim.
Which only leaves Dunn's account of threats to his life being the reason he reacted.
Thompson testified that he couldn’t hear everything Davis said, but that he didn’t hear him threaten Dunn in any way,
The underlined is not credible because of the statement that preceded it.
If he couldn't hear everything said, then he can not say with any certainty what wasn't said.
If folks do not understand that, something is wrong.
and that he was certain Davis never tried to get out of the car during the argument. Brunson testified that in order for Davis, who was sitting in the back passenger seat, to get out of the car, someone in the driver's seat would have had to unlock the child-proof locks for him.
Not credible, as was disproved by entry angle of the rounds fired. The door was open.
And during the first trial the safety lock bs was shown to be false showing the friends were liars. Which wasn't the only thing that showed they had lied.
And this too:
The former medical examiner who performed the autopsy on Mr. Davis also testified Monday that it was “unlikely” Mr. Davis was standing when he was shot. This contradicted the claim that Mr. Davis was out of the Durango. The wounds, the examiner said, indicated that Mr. Davis, who bore no traces of alcohol or drugs, was sitting in the vehicle and leaning away.
:doh
You do not seem to remember what a piss poor witness that med examiner was. Most likely because you do not know the evidence.
I would suggest you review her direct and cross.
And again. The angle of the wounds are consistent with his diving back into the vehicle.
Pretty much irrelevant.
Ms. Rouer not remembering what she was told means nothing. We saw how shaken up and fragile she was when she was on the stand the first time.
She isn't all there. Her not remembering means nothing.
