It was about specific Jurors who believed his account, as they wanted to acquit.
I already provided the information that three jurors wanted to acquit. Do you not know what the word acquit means.
Wanting to acquit is vastly different from being undecided. They are the reason the jury was hung.
So all you are doing again is showing that you do not pay attention, and are dishonest.
A news report is not evidence.
As you were already told, she was not credible.
She was destroyed on cross and by the testimony of another expert.
Your fault again for not knowing the actual evidence.
He was not seated when shot.
And as this argument has already been had on this site, as you were told, it has already been sourced.
You have not actually provided evidence.
You actually keep avoiding it.
A reporters opinion is not evidence.
So again, back to the stuff you keep avoiding, the actual evidence.
Try debating the actual evidence for once.Lets see if you will at least be honest here. (so far you have failed)
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.
A reporters opinion is irrelevant.
Funny you do not know that even though it has repeatedly been pointed pout to you.
All because you do not know what you are talking about.
Three jurors wanted to acquit him.
And yes, you were already given the link to it.
So stop with the dishonesty and lies already.