• 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

Excon said:
Why are you quoting what I said to another person, and making an irrelevant response to it?

You still need to back up your claims, which we already know you can not do.
Click to expand...
My testimony is evidence which you've repeatedly stated is acceptable.

Did Dunn have any inaccuracies in his statements?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
My testimony is evidence which you've repeatedly stated is acceptable.
Click to expand...
You are being silly. You were not a witness, and you did not testify during the trial.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
You are being silly. You were not a witness, and you did not testify during the trial.
Click to expand...

No, no, no, you were stating that Dunn's testimony was evidence before it was ever admitted to court.

My testimony, which is likewise not yet admitted into court, is also evidence. These are your standards.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
No, no, no, you were stating that Dunn's testimony was evidence before it was ever admitted to court.

My testimony, which is likewise not yet admitted into court, is also evidence. These are your standards.
Click to expand...
You are again being silly again.
Your take on what you think my standards are, is ridiculous.
He was a witness to what happened. His account is evidence.
You were not a witness, so you are being absurdly silly.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
You are again being silly again.
He was a witness to what happened. His account is evidence.
You were not a witness, so you are being absurdly silly.
Click to expand...

How do you know I wasn't a witness?

Did Dunn have any inaccuracies in his statements?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
How do you know I wasn't a witness?

Did Dunn have any inaccuracies in his statements?
Click to expand...
And again, stop being silly, stop dodging and support your claims.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
And again, stop being silly, stop dodging and support your claims.
Click to expand...
1) My testimony is evidence not yet admitted to court. You supported this for Dunn and you should support it for me.

2) Prove that I'm not a witness. There is circumstantial evidence that I'm a witness.

3) Were there any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

:laughat:
reinoe said:
1) My testimony is evidence not yet admitted to court. You supported this for Dunn and you should support it for me.

2) Prove that I'm not a witness. There is circumstantial evidence that I'm a witness.

3) Were there any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements?
Click to expand...
:screwy
Silly post.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
:laughat:
:screwy
Silly post.
Click to expand...

I'm just taking your comments to their logical extreme. Now you realize how your behavior makes you look to the majority of the forum since this trial began.

edit: Do you think there were any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
I'm just taking your comments to their logical extreme. Now you realize how your behavior makes you look to the majority of the forum since this trial began.
Click to expand...

No you are not. Your assertions were silly. You can't even stay within context. :doh


As for your appeal to masses?
That just shows your position is nothing but fail from the get.
 
Last edited:
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
No you are not. Your assertions were silly. You can't even stay within context. :doh


As for your appeal to masses?
That just shows your position is nothing but fail from the get.
Click to expand...
What's silly about my assertions?

Were there any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
What's silly about my assertions?
Click to expand...
It was already pointed out.

reinoe said:
Were there any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements?
Click to expand...
You have to support your claims, which so far, you have failed to do.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
No, it wasn't.

It was already pointed out.
Click to expand...
Around and around we go.

Why are you playing games?
I already pointed out your silliness.
Here are some of them.

reinoe said:
1) My testimony is evidence not yet admitted to court. You supported this for Dunn and you should support it for me.

2) Prove that I'm not a witness. There is circumstantial evidence that I'm a witness.
Click to expand...

And another.
reinoe said:
There is evidence that Dunn is a liar because that's my testimony. Claim substantiated.
Click to expand...



And you have failed to back up your claims.
As already stated 40 posts ago.

Play your games elsewhere.

There are folks saying he lied. Not only that he lied, but that it has been proven. And that just ain't so.
Those claims are nothing more than their own suspicious mind at work.

Just like your claims of there is (no reason to believe) or about his GF stating otherwise.
It is all made up crap from suspicious minds.​

All you have done is to adopt a silly and irrelevant question posed by another.

So either back up your claims or cease.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
Around and around we go.

Why are you playing games?
I already pointed out your silliness.
Here are some of them.

And another.


And you have failed to back up your claims.
As already stated 40 posts ago.
Play your games elsewhere.

There are folks saying he lied. Not only that he lied, but that it has been proven. And that just ain't so.
Those claims are nothing more than their own suspicious mind at work.

Just like your claims of there is (no reason to believe) or about his GF stating otherwise.
It is all made up crap from suspicious minds.​

All you have done is to adopt a silly and irrelevant question posed by another.

So either back up your claims or cease.
Click to expand...
The $64K question is why you think my testimony isn't evidence but you think Dunn's is.

The other one is do you think there were any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
The $64K question is why you think my testimony isn't evidence but you think Dunn's is.

The other one is do you think there were any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements.
Click to expand...
Your questions as well as your games are irrelevant.
You still have failed to back up you claims.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
Your questions as well as your games are irrelevant.
You still have failed to back up you claims.
Click to expand...
My testimony backs up my claim.

Were there any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements?
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

reinoe said:
My testimony backs up my claim.

Were there any inaccuracies in Dunn's statements?
Click to expand...

Your questions as well as your games are irrelevant.
And you still have failed to back up your claims.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

year2late said:
Actually is that the standard? I recall someone on another thread posting something from a legal site that essentially indicated the planning could be a very rapid process. I do not recall having any strong feelings about the reliability of that website.

That being said, after watching Law and Order for 20 years, it seems like Murder 2 - depraved indifference to me.:lol:
Click to expand...

These are state cases not federal cases. Most state statutes are similar for premeditated murder, but at the same time there is also a lot of precedence out there.

Obviously juveniles (even in capital cases) will at most serve until they're 21(most of the time in a psych hospital) and be released (not all cases but most).
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Excon said:
1. You clearly are confused and not understanding what you are reading. I said there is circumstantial evidence that suggests the gun did exist.

Puh-lease!
The circumstantial evidence is there, and suggestive like I said.
Click to expand...

I am afraid you do not understand the concept of circumstantial evidence.

Circumstantial Evidence is also known as indirect evidence. It is distinguished from direct evidence, which, if believed, proves the existence of a particular fact without any inference or presumption required. Circumstantial evidence relates to a series of facts other than the particular fact sought to be proved. The party offering circumstantial evidence argues that this series of facts, by reason and experience, is so closely associated with the fact to be proved that the fact to be proved may be inferred simply from the existence of the circumstantial evidence.

The following examples illustrate the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence: If John testifies that he saw Tom raise a gun and fire it at Ann and that Ann then fell to the ground, John's testimony is direct evidence that Tom shot Ann. If the jury believes John's testimony, then it must conclude that Tom did in fact shoot Ann. If, however, John testifies that he saw Tom and Ann go into another room and that he heard Tom say to Ann that he was going to shoot her, heard a shot, and saw Tom leave the room with a smoking gun, then John's testimony is circumstantial evidence from which it can be inferred that Tom shot Ann. The jury must determine whether John's testimony is credible.
Click to expand...
Circumstantial Evidence legal definition of Circumstantial Evidence. Circumstantial Evidence synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

There is no circumstantial evidence, nor any facts supporting the existence of the alleged shotgun, and the only witness who claimed to have seen the boys with 'something', then effectively retracted that evidence when questioned under oath.

LOL, you may make as many offensive personal remarks as you like, but your position is not supported by established fact. I have made my point to the satisfaction of others, and am finished with you - you may go now. :lol:
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Leo said:
I am afraid you do not understand the concept of circumstantial evidence.

Circumstantial Evidence legal definition of Circumstantial Evidence. Circumstantial Evidence synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

There is no circumstantial evidence, nor any facts supporting the existence of the alleged shotgun, and the only witness who claimed to have seen the boys with 'something', then effectively retracted that evidence when questioned under oath.

LOL, you may make as many offensive personal remarks as you like, but your position is not supported by established fact. I have made my point to the satisfaction of others, and am finished with you - you may go now. :lol:
Click to expand...

Lack of any circumstantial evidence for a shotgun is really bad for him.

Not reporting the incident immediately (IMHO) destroyed his credibility.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Leo said:
I am afraid you do not understand the concept of circumstantial evidence.

Circumstantial Evidence legal definition of Circumstantial Evidence. Circumstantial Evidence synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

There is no circumstantial evidence, nor any facts supporting the existence of the alleged shotgun, and the only witness who claimed to have seen the boys with 'something', then effectively retracted that evidence when questioned under oath.

LOL, you may make as many offensive personal remarks as you like, but your position is not supported by established fact. I have made my point to the satisfaction of others, and am finished with you - you may go now. :lol:
Click to expand...
To be accurate, the two witnesses did not claim to have seen the boys with 'something', rather the two witnesses initially said the boys appeared to be "stashing" something.

Obviously they later retracted that claim because at that time they didn't know whether the boys were good guys or bad guys when they heard the shots. They didn't know what to make of it when one of the boys went to the back, lifted the hatchback door and leaned in and so by that posture they just assumed he was stashing something.
 
Last edited:
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

year2late said:
Lack of any circumstantial evidence for a shotgun is really bad for him.

Not reporting the incident immediately (IMHO) destroyed his credibility.
Click to expand...
Not only the two witnesses' claim of appearance of stashing was retracted but also if there was a shotgun taken out of the Durango by the boys to be stashed right back into the back of the vehicle (how logical is that?), there was no shotgun found inside the vehicle when the police arrived and impounded the Durango.

There was no shotgun found anywhere in the parking lot either and the two witnesses did not see the two boys walk away from the Durango to the dumpsters that were far away behind the building.

Whatever "circumstantial evidence" Excon desperately trying to claim, the evidence from witnesses and logic all pointed to Dunn's propensity to lie and make up stuff in order to save his butt. His running away without reporting the shooting to the police until he was caught and then made up lies to police and even under oath only proved that he is a pathological liar. Yet, he was arrogant and obnoxious towards Guy when his numerous lies were exposed in front of the judge and jury.

For the three stupid jurors to believe an outright and obnoxious perjured killer's stories, they themselves must have been cut from the same cloth.
 
Last edited:
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

I don't know what shenanigans Excon was trying to pull when he frequently talked about the driver calling his aunt who later came into the area.

Tommy the driver had to call his aunt and she has to come for the following reasons:

1. She is the registered owner of the Durango.

2. Tommy wasn't the owner of the Durango and his name was not in the title.

3. Since he was driving a vehicle that did not belong to him he had to call his aunt to verify to the police he did not steal the vehicle but had her permission to drive it.

4. He got his aunt's car in a mess, he had to call her to let her know what happened.

5. She had to come to the area because she had to verify to the police she owned the vehicle and she had to grant the police to search her vehicle and signed paper for the impoundment and get police report to file for her insurance claim.

It's just dishonest to create a false sense of fishiness when there was none.
 
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial

Leo said:
I am afraid you do not understand the concept of circumstantial evidence.

Circumstantial Evidence legal definition of Circumstantial Evidence. Circumstantial Evidence synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

There is no circumstantial evidence, nor any facts supporting the existence of the alleged shotgun, and the only witness who claimed to have seen the boys with 'something', then effectively retracted that evidence when questioned under oath.

LOL, you may make as many offensive personal remarks as you like, but your position is not supported by established fact. I have made my point to the satisfaction of others, and am finished with you - you may go now. :lol:
Click to expand...
Your understanding is limited and therefore faulty.
It also makes you wrong to that we are speaking about.
And you again show you know not the testimony being discussed, as nothing was retracted under oath.



What is CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE?

Evidence directed to the attending circumstances ; evidence which inferentially proves the principal fact by establishing a condition of surrounding and limiting circumstances, whose existence is a premise from which the existence of the principal fact may be concluded by necessary laws of reasoning. State v. Avery, 113 Mo. 475, 21 S. W. 193; Howard v. State, 34 Ark. 433; State v. Evans, 1 Marvel (Del.) 477, 41 Atl. 136; Comm. v. Webster, 5 Cush. (Mass.) 319, 52 Am. Dec. 711; Gardner v. Preston, 2 Day (Conn.) 205. 2 Am. Dec. 91; State v. Miller, 9 Houst. (Del.) 564, 32 Atl. 137. When the existence of any fact is attested by witnesses, as having come under the cognizance of their senses, or is stated in documents, the genuineness and veracity of which there seems no reason to question, the evidence of that fact is said to be direct or positive. When, on the contrary, the existence of the principal fact is only inferred from one or more circumstances which have been established directly, the evidence is said to be circumstantial. And when the existence of the principal fact does not follow from the evidentiary facts as a necessary consequence of the law of nature, but is deduced from them by a process of probable reasoning, the evidence and proof are said to be presumptive. Best, Pres. 240; Id. 12. All presumptive evidence is circumstantial, because necessarily derived from or made up of circumstances, but all circumstantial evidence is not presumptive, that is, it does not operate in the way of presumption, being sometimes of a higher grade, and lending to necessary conclusions, instead of probable ones. Burrill. CIRCUMSTANTIBUS, TALES DE. See TALES.​

Law Dictionary: What is CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE? definition of CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE (Black's Law Dictionary)

What is CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE? definition of CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE (Black's Law Dictionary)​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom