- Joined
- Mar 21, 2012
- Messages
- 40,615
- Reaction score
- 9,087
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Re: Dunn convicted of attempted murder; hung jury on murder in 'loud-music' trial
The rest mattered not to the point that you were discussing me.
That is not permitted.
Try to at least learn something here.
She presented no reliable evidence to the contrary.
But since you think she did, what is it you think she presented?
Dunn claimed there was a gun, and that has not been disproved as required. Whether you like it or not, that is the way it works.
But to him, it was. And that is really what matters here.
Two; Nor is he required.
Davis's friends came off as unbelievable and their credibility was shot.
And as previously stated, their actions after the shooting of not calling 911 but getting out and being seen by a witness in what appeared to be stashing something, in connection with the driver calling his aunt instead, and her then coming into the area and the police not searching for four days, all leads to the possibility that the gun actually existed and was stashed.
Nothing I said goes to them ducking. ???
Nothing I said goes to them being in the same vehicle as the threat that was being shot at. ???
You are speaking nonsense.
Prove it by something other than what Dunn said? Wow! Simply wow!
The specificity was pointed out in trial.
She did not have all the information to draw her conclusions. You keep getting told this, yet you continually ignore the realty of it.
It was pointed out in trial. What do you not understand about that?
My statements have been backed up.
It is your imaginative ones that have not, nor can they ever be.
Holy ****! Apparently you do not know the difference. You were discussing me. Cutting off the rest was not dishonest. You were discussing me.do not be dishonest and cut off the quote. I said excon believes. that is your thoughts and what you think not you.
The rest mattered not to the point that you were discussing me.
That is not permitted.
Try to at least learn something here.
Totally incorrect and therefore wrong.he didn't according to the evidence submitted by the prosecution and the testimony of all witnesses including dunn himself.
She presented no reliable evidence to the contrary.
But since you think she did, what is it you think she presented?
No I haven't ignored anything, which has nothing with what you are saying now. Which is still inexplicable, as I do not need to present anything other than the evidence as it is. Do you really not realize that?yes you have because you have yet to present anything that backs up any argument you have made here other than dunn said. which is well not an argument.
Incorrect. What you said does not exist in reality, so they were nothing more than the manifestations of your imagination.ad hominen irrelevant to a debate.
Wrong. I do not need to provided any other evidence other than his account.there was no gun. so that has been disproven. if you say there was a gun prove it by something other than what dunn "claimed".
Dunn claimed there was a gun, and that has not been disproved as required. Whether you like it or not, that is the way it works.
No he doesn't. It is the prosecution that must show he didn't.wrong. he has to supply enough evidence to make himself believable.
No it doesn't. Even I had said so previously.in fact he saw what he appeared to be a barrel that doesn't make it a gun.
But to him, it was. And that is really what matters here.
Her, an obviously emotionally disturbed person, not remembering, doesn't mean he didn't tell her.the fact he didn't tell his g/f that there was a gun.
Two; Nor is he required.
I see you did not understand what reliable evidence meant. :dohnone of the kids in the car said they had a gun and no gun was found.
Davis's friends came off as unbelievable and their credibility was shot.
And as previously stated, their actions after the shooting of not calling 911 but getting out and being seen by a witness in what appeared to be stashing something, in connection with the driver calling his aunt instead, and her then coming into the area and the police not searching for four days, all leads to the possibility that the gun actually existed and was stashed.
??? You are speaking nonsense as to what you quoted.that is what they claimed of course they were probably ducking because they were being shot at. so again non-reliable testimony that would cause them to be shot at.And because of Davis's friends actions, and that of a witness that saw one of them in what appeared to be stashing something, coupled with the driver calling his aunt instead of completing a call to 911, and her then coming into the area, and the police not looking until days later, you have all the makings that the gun really did exist and was stashed. And that is what you are ignoring as it has been pointed out several times now.
no you don't prove it.
Nothing I said goes to them ducking. ???
Nothing I said goes to them being in the same vehicle as the threat that was being shot at. ???
You are speaking nonsense.
Wow! You are apparently becoming distracted by something.prove it. if you can't prove it with anything other than dunn said then you can't prove it therefore her information is accurate. do you not understand that. the arguments in a debate are much higher than a defense. if you want to make an assertion that this is a fact then you have to be able to supply the evidence to prove it.Why are you so confused about this?
No one said she lied. It was said that her conclusions were based on faulty information. Do you really not understand that?
Garbage in, garbage out.
if you can't then your point is invalid.
Prove it by something other than what Dunn said? Wow! Simply wow!
The specificity was pointed out in trial.
She did not have all the information to draw her conclusions. You keep getting told this, yet you continually ignore the realty of it.
It was pointed out in trial. What do you not understand about that?
Now you are just taking your imaginative crap to a new level.They did during the trial which is why the majority of jury members found him guilty of murder they just couldn't convince the others.More imaginative bs from.prove with anything other than what dunn said happened since his story is well crap and he couldn't even tell it straight the 2nd time.
Dispute his account with actual evidence and not your imagination.
Yes you are qwrong as usual.wrong. is the only thing you can say because you can't back up any of your statements.
My statements have been backed up.
It is your imaginative ones that have not, nor can they ever be.