Bubble Screen Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Surprised no one has started a thread for this, given the trial started this week. My early take: Dunn is cooked. That is, unless the defense can produce a witness that saw the teens stashing a weapon after the shooting. I hate rap music. But I would never ask 4 black teens (or white, for that matter) in an SUV to turn down their music. That's just asking for trouble. It's annoying as hell, but he only had to put up with it long enough for his gf to run into the Gate to buy a bottle of wine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I vaguely recall this occurring during the Zimmerman trial. Got a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 8, 2014 Author Share Posted February 8, 2014 I vaguely recall this occurring during the Zimmerman trial. Got a link? Figured everyone had heard about this. Sorry. Not sure how to post one.If it helps, my title came from watching the news on HLN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Here ya go: http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/06/justice/florida-loud-music-murder-trial/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 8, 2014 Author Share Posted February 8, 2014 Appreciate it, skinsfan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCranon21 Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I heard about this. After the guy shot up the car the kids were in, he pulled off, walked his dog and ordered a pizza like nothing happened. This is murder 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 8, 2014 Author Share Posted February 8, 2014 I heard about this. After the guy shot up the car the kids were in, he pulled off, walked his dog and ordered a pizza like nothing happened. This is murder 1.Yep. AFTER driving about two hours away. The guy is a POS. He also continued firing on the SUV as its FLEEING the seen. Not too bright. SYG (stand your ground) isn't going to apply here. His only defense could be if the teens did in fact have a weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Wow. Just read the link. Whole lot of shifty characters involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 Amazing no one seems to care about this case. smh Another thing I've learned is that the DA is Angela Corey, the same woman from the Zimmerman trial. And John Guy is the prosecutor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I think we're all "Trayvon Martined" out. We've seen this story already and chances are, this guy walks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 I think we're all "Trayvon Martined" out. We've seen this story already and chances are, this guy walks.See, everyone keeps linking these cases together, when they are not even close to the same.And there is no way Dunn walks, unless the defense can prove the teens had a weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I think we're all "Trayvon Martined" out. We've seen this story already and chances are, this guy walks.  Uh, if I were betting, I'd be betting against it. With long odds, in fact. ---------- See, everyone keeps linking these cases together, when they are not even close to the same. It's possible they both involved a Big Gulp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Not much to talk about...clearly guilty unless something changes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I honestly hadn't heard about it until you mentioned it in the other thread. Seems like some more bologna. He said he saw the teens with a gun. No gun was found. He kept firing multiple times even as the car drove off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 Not much to talk about...clearly guilty unless something changesThat's mostly it, I guess.Interestingly, this jury is sequestered and they even had court today. Dunn's fiancé testified today and supposedly didn't help his case at all. I honestly hadn't heard about it until you mentioned it in the other thread. Seems like some more bologna. He said he saw the teens with a gun. No gun was found. He kept firing multiple times even as the car drove off. Supposedly, the defense is saying there was time for the teens to dispose of a weapon. And it's possible, because they drove to a nearby parking lot after the shooting and then returned to the scene. Possible, but probably unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Supposedly, the defense is saying there was time for the teens to dispose of a weapon. And it's possible, because they drove to a nearby parking lot after the shooting and then returned to the scene. Hadn't heard that twist. Still, far as I'm aware, he shot into the back of a car that was leaving. (Although, if those bullets weren't the ones that killed the guy, does that make a difference?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 Hadn't heard that twist. Still, far as I'm aware, he shot into the back of a car that was leaving. (Although, if those bullets weren't the ones that killed the guy, does that make a difference?) Right. That is very damning that Dunn fired shots as the Durango is driving away. Or, it at least tells you that the teens likely never had a gun. But Dunn didn't specify they had one. He says he thought he saw Davis reach down and then either he saw a gun or something appear.As far as I know, one of the shots killed Davis as both cars were side by side. Dunn, I believe, fired 8 shots into the passenger side and one into the back window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 See, everyone keeps linking these cases together, when they are not even close to the same. And there is no way Dunn walks, unless the defense can prove the teens had a weapon. It's not that the cases are linked per se, but there are some similarities to the arguments though. The teens are said to have left the parking lot afterwards which creates doubt that there may have been a weapon. Once again a FL Keystone Kops police dept. bungles the investigation. The witnesses seem to have conflicting or changed stories and aren't exactly salt of the earth types. That equals doubt about their credibility. As for shooting into the back of the vehicle as it was moving away, well if he thought they had a weapon he might have expected them to fire back at him. And since they were teens playing loud rap music they're threatening to start with.If I'm understanding it correctly, all that has to happen is for the shooter to be in fear of his life. If his lawyer can create just enough doubt that he thought there was a weapon or that maybe there was one, BINGO! Not guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 Dunn is claiming also that Davis said he was going to "kill that ****". As far as them leaving the scene. That would make sense to flee if you don't have a gun. Whether Davis brandished any other kind of weapon is another story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 If I'm understanding it correctly, all that has to happen is for the shooter to be in fear of his life.   Reasonable fear.....one word makes a big difference just as the presence of a gun would Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It's not that the cases are linked per se, but there are some similarities to the arguments though. The teens are said to have left the parking lot afterwards which creates doubt that there may have been a weapon. Once again a FL Keystone Kops police dept. bungles the investigation. The witnesses seem to have conflicting or changed stories and aren't exactly salt of the earth types. That equals doubt about their credibility. As for shooting into the back of the vehicle as it was moving away, well if he thought they had a weapon he might have expected them to fire back at him. And since they were teens playing loud rap music they're threatening to start with. If I'm understanding it correctly, all that has to happen is for the shooter to be in fear of his life. If his lawyer can create just enough doubt that he thought there was a weapon or that maybe there was one, BINGO! Not guilty. The sad thing is... the jury could buy into this logic. (I'm not being insulting to you by saying that. FL is just that ****ed up. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Reasonable fear.....one word makes a big difference just as the presence of a gun would If I create doubt in the minds of the jury as to whether the victim had a weapon that means he was in reasonable fear of his life, no? If there was solid testimony from good upstanding citizens that the teens never left the scene it's probably a lock. However there's testimony that they may have left, that one of them may have been hiding something and the Keystone Kops didn't properly secure the scene. If his lawyer put on a decent defense, even I would be forced to vote not guilty based on the law, a very flawed law. Again, anything, literally anything that the defense can find to create doubt in the minds of the jury that the killer was in fear for his life will probably result in an acquittal. As for the reasonable part, that's very subjective and quite frankly, I think in most cases most people will find any fear for one's life to be reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 it is also reasonable doubt....I kinda share your disdain for juries, and do my best to keep my life out of their justice or tender mercies.  I hate that cases have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt....till I'm in the dock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 So was the gun ever found in the kids' car??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 So was the gun ever found in the kids' car???No, but they briefly left the Gate parking lot and into an adjacent shopping center one. But as I said earlier, the defense is saying they had time to disgard one. That will be a key part of the case.Also, I saw pics of the inside of the Durango. There were numchucks or however you spell them in the car. Dunn didn't say for certain there was a gun. But he did say Davis said he was going to kill him. So I guess any object like that could help Dunn's defense. And he needs a lot of help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.