Page 12 of 17 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 164

Thread: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

  1. #111
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    And what you stated is incorrect. It was hung on the subject we are speaking about.
    All you are doing is showing that you do not know what you are talking about.
    With all due respect, your assertion that jury did not reject Dunn's self-defense alibi was incorrect. The jury did absolutely no such thing. The first jury convicted him on the second degree murder charges. If you believe it exonerated him, which is the only outcome if it accepted his self-defense claim, please provide a link. There is none, because that's not what happened.

    The second jury convicted him on the second and first degree murder charges, again not accepting the self-defense argument.

    I provided links to both cases and a news story describing events is not a newspaper editorial nor an op-ed. There is a difference between the editorial and op-ed pages and the news pages. Both the CBS News and New York Times stories were news, not opinion. Moreover, all the major news sources reported the same story. So if one has to choose between all the news accounts and one's dissenting opinion as to what happened, the risk that every major news outlet would be incorrect is improbable.

    Mr. Dunn is now serving the sentence for the murder he committed. If credible new evidence comes to light that he might have acted in self-defense (extremely unlikely given that two trials vetted the evidence), I'll look further at the case.

    The evidence made a self-defense claim unsustainable. Dunn's actions afterward in choosing not to report the incident to the police even after learning that one of his shooting victims had died further undercut notions that he had acted in self-defense. The jury acted in accordance with the evidence. I agree with the jury given the evidence that was reported. You don't and that's a matter of belief.

    At this time, there is nothing further I can add. I've provide multiple links. Objective readers who go through the stories will almost certainly understand why neither jury accepted the self-defense alibi (no actual threat: unarmed teens, Davis was seated when shot, the teens were trying to drive away; no reasonably perceived threat: no weapons were found, none of the witnesses saw a shotgun or other weapon, his fiance revealed that he had never told her about any gun, the teens were leaving not escalating the argument). The conditions for an imminent actual or perceived threat to Dunn's life or of serious harm were not present.

  2. #112
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Incorrect and also unsourced. His actions following the shooting incident formed part of the Prosecution's successful line of argument.
    Wrong.
    You are forgetting that these discussions already happened.
    All you are doing is continuing to show you know not of what you speak.
    He was not required to report anything.

    And asking anybody to source that which does not exist, is just silly.



    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    This time, prosecutors homed in more forcefully on Mr. Dunn’s actions after the shooting, behavior that they said cloaked him in guilt. Mr. Dunn fled the scene and never called the police, not even after he learned that someone had died. Instead, he and the woman who was then his fiancée drove to their hotel, where he walked the dog, poured himself a rum and Coke and ordered a pizza. The next day he drove two and a half hours back to his house in Satellite Beach, where the police, who by then had his license plate number, arrested him.

    “If you are fighting to defend your life, you don’t then run from the scene,” said Angela B. Corey, the state attorney for the county, in a news conference after the verdict.

    All irrelevant.
    A prosecutors argument, before, during, or after the trial, is not evidence. D'oh!



    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    As stated in #66 in this thread:

    In general, a reasonable person would have to fear imminent serious harm or threat to his/her life in order to be justified in shooting another person.

    There was no actual threat of that nature and no reasonable basis to perceive such a threat. Someone's fearing something means they perceive it.

    As there was no actual threat nor one that a reasonable person would have perceived of a nature that justified the shooting, the self-defense argument was not credible. A murder took place and the conviction and sentence were wholly warranted.
    You keep going in circles with your nonsense.
    Reasonable folks do think his belief was reasonable. It is why it was hung the first time.
    It is also why polling shows that others believe he should not have been convicted.
    And as previously shown, the juror from the first trial wanted to find him guilty simply because she believed he had other options such as rolling up his window (which d'oh, was already up).

    So stop talking nonsense and basing your arguments on a logical fallacy.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  3. #113
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    With all due respect, your assertion that jury did not reject Dunn's self-defense alibi was incorrect. The jury did absolutely no such thing. The first jury convicted him on the second degree murder charges. If you believe it exonerated him, which is the only outcome if it accepted his self-defense claim, please provide a link. There is none, because that's not what happened.

    The second jury convicted him on the second and first degree murder charges, again not accepting the self-defense argument.

    I provided links to both cases and news story describing events is not a newspaper editorial nor an op-ed. There is a difference between the editorial and op-ed pages and the news pages. Both the CBS New and New York Times stories were news, not opinion. Moreover, all the major news sources reported the same story. So if one has to choose between all the news accounts and one's dissenting opinion as to what happened, the risk that every major news outlet would be incorrect is improbable.

    Mr. Dunn is now serving the sentence for the murder he committed. If credible new evidence comes to light that he might have acted in self-defense (extremely unlikely given that two trials vetted the evidence), I'll look further at the case.

    The evidence made a self-defense claim unsustainable. Dunn's actions afterward in choosing not to report the incident to the police even after learning that one of his shooting victims had died further undercut notions that he had acted in self-defense. The jury acted in accordance with the evidence. I agree with the jury given the evidence that was reported. You don't and that's a matter of belief.

    At this time, there is nothing further I can add. I've provide multiple links. Objective readers who go through the stories will almost certainly understand why neither jury accepted the self-defense alibi (no actual threat: unarmed teens, Davis was seated when shot, the teens were trying to drive away; no reasonably perceived threat: no weapons were found, none of the witnesses saw a shotgun or other weapon, the teens were leaving not escalating the argument). The conditions for an imminent actual or perceived threat to Dunn's life or of serious harm were not present.
    Wow! You continually show you have no clue as to what you speak, all the while relying on a logical fallacy.
    He could not claim self defense to the other charges. They did nothing requiring the use of self defense.
    The jury had no choice in regards to those charges.

    And you repeatedly have shown that you do not know the evidence to even speak about it, especially as the evidence did support self defense.

    So not only have you shown you do not know the evidence, don't pay attention to it when it is given to you, but instead choose to rely on a logical fallacy as an argument. That is called nonsense.
    And on top of that, you also want to insert another logical fallacy of an appeal to the masses.

    You have been given numerous opportunities to discuss the actual evidence, but continually choose not to, and instead wish to illogically rely on others opinions.
    You as well as your arguments have failed.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  4. #114
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by lifeisshort View Post
    Interesting way to discuss and debate you have shown here
    What's to debate? You haven't posted anything other than dismissive victimhood and/or delusional nonsense in response to what I posted. If you'd like to go back to my original post and offer something substantive in response, perhaps we could debate the issue - otherwise, what's the point?
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  5. #115
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    And asking anybody to source that which does not exist, is just silly.
    And they don't exist, because none of the two juries accepted Dunn's claim of self-defense.

    Reasonable folks do think his belief was reasonable. It is why it was hung the first time.
    Again, wrong. The first jury did not exonerate Dunn. It convicted him on the second degree murder charges. The only issue on which it deadlocked was whether the murder was premeditated (first-degree). The question as to whether a murder was premeditated (1st degree) is not the same thing as accepting the self-defense alibi. If the jury had accepted it, Dunn would have been acquitted on all of the murder charges. That's not what happened.

    If the first jury accepted the self-defense alibi, provide the link.

  6. #116
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,512

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Since when do contracts with ANYONE permit and cover murder? Sorry but having a contract does not give one a license to commit murder and get away from the laws of the land. Besides, its obvious that the contract was nullified the moment it was broke. Which it was here.
    Is that what I said? No? I didn't think so. I said civil rights. Care to discuss what I said and not what I didn't?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #117
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,756

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by lifeisshort View Post
    It is a way of having boots on the ground somewhat covertly and retaining plausible deniability.
    With no structured chain of command. That is a recipe for disaster, as we have already seen.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  8. #118
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    And asking anybody to source that which does not exist, is just silly.
    And they don't exist, because none of the two juries accepted Dunn's claim of self-defense.

    Nothing you said has anything to do with what you quoted.

    As I said, there was no requirement that he report the shooting.
    Such a requirement is what doesn't exist and was that which was silly of you to ask me to source.

    Since you obviously have trouble following your own conversations, the following isn't just to help you (as we already know you do not pay attention), but so others can see just how wrong you are again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Mr. Dunn fled the scene and never called the police, ...
    Irrelevant.
    He wasn't required to do so.
    And his stated reasoning is reasonable given the trauma he experienced.
    Incorrect and also unsourced. His actions following the shooting incident formed part of the Prosecution's successful line of argument.
    Wrong.
    You are forgetting that these discussions already happened.
    All you are doing is continuing to show you know not of what you speak.
    He was not required to report anything.

    And asking anybody to source that which does not exist, is just silly.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    You keep going in circles with your nonsense.
    Reasonable folks do think his belief was reasonable. It is why it was hung the first time.
    It is also why polling shows that others believe he should not have been convicted.
    And as previously shown, the juror from the first trial wanted to find him guilty simply because she believed he had other options such as rolling up his window (which d'oh, was already up).

    So stop talking nonsense and basing your arguments on a logical fallacy.
    Again, wrong. The first jury did not exonerate Dunn. It convicted him on the second degree murder charges.
    You were already told you are wrong and why you are wrong. Pay attention.
    1.) The murder of Davis was what was being discussed, not the other charges.
    2.) His self defense claim was only to the shooting of Davis. He had no self defense claim against the other charges. Those young men did nothing that required him to defend himself against and thus he could not claim such. The verdict on those charges were a given as the Jury had no choice.
    And as already pointed out, had he been found not guilty this time around those other findings likely would not have stood.


    And yes folks did believe, and do believe he acted reasonably.
    You are just making absurd claims you can not support, all because you do not know the evidence or this case.

    First trial
    Within the first hour of deliberations, juror #4, identified only as Valerie, said there was no chance of a murder conviction because two jurors thought Dunn was justified in his actions.
    Juror in Michael Dunn trial wanted murder conviction
    Which later changed to three jurors.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    If the jury had accepted it, Dunn would have been acquitted on all of the murder charges. That's not what happened.
    And again you are wrong and again showing that you are completely ignorant of that which you speak.

    The Juror mentioned above said she believed his account but thought he shouldn't have kept shooting. Making it 4 who believed his account.
    And it was obvious by the reason she gave for her decision that she didn't understand the evidence presented.
    Again exemplifying the fact that juries get things wrong all the time.


    So again, back to the actual evidence. You know, that stuff you keep avoiding.

    Lets see if you will at least be honest here.

    The evidence says that Davis was the only one angry and irate and it was directed towards Dunn.
    It also shows that Davis got out of the Durango as Dunn stated.

    So for what purpose do you suppose the angry and irate Davis got out of the vehicle?
    The only logical conclusion from the evidence would be to carry through with his threats to Dunn.
    No other reason exists.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  9. #119
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,866
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Is that what I said? No? I didn't think so. I said civil rights. Care to discuss what I said and not what I didn't?
    This is what you said....


    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You do if you're working for the United States government. That protection is probably in their contract. I know I wouldn't sign a contract without out it.
    So yes, it is what you said. Your civil rights comment was shot down several posts ago and then you mentioned contracts with the government. Don't run away from what you said. Man up and own it.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #120
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,073

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    They're American citizens working for The United States government. They don't fit the description of a mercenary.
    Mercenary | Define Mercenary at Dictionary.com

    adjective
    1.
    working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal.
    2.
    hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization, etc.

    noun, plural mercenaries.
    3.
    a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army.
    They fit all 3 definitions. Stating anything else is semantics.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 12 of 17 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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