DM72 Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Looks like it will be a mistrial. Wow. I guess it's open season on black youths in Fl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 Looks like it will be a mistrial. Wow. I guess it's open season on black youths in Fl.It's only a mistrial on the first degree murder charge, dude.Dunn is getting up to 75 years (life). The jury got it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 He was found guilty of attempted murder and firing at a car. But not murder? So in other words, the parents of Davis isn't getting any justice. This verdict was BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 I was technically right. He walked for killing the kid. His only mistake was that he didn't kill the others. If that had happened there would have been no witnesses and he'd be free.  Black kids in Florida, arm yourselves and if any old White dudes even twitch, shoot first and claim self defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 He wasn't outright acquitted of the murder charge, so he could be tried again. Prosecution needs to correctly charge him with 2nd degree. The attempted murder charges were for 2nd degree.  I think prosecutors need to start charging correctly and not overreaching with their charges. They'd get more and more accurate convictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 I was technically right. He walked for killing the kid. His only mistake was that he didn't kill the others. If that had happened there would have been no witnesses and he'd be free.  Black kids in Florida, arm yourselves and if any old White dudes even twitch, shoot first and claim self defense.  walked? He will get a minimum of 20yrs and will be retried on the Davis murder.  I'm all in favor of arming and defending yourself though.....if you are willing to do the time if ya screw up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 He was found guilty of attempted murder and firing at a car. But not murder? So in other words, the parents of Davis isn't getting any justice. This verdict was BS."Aren't"And you can blame DA Angela Corey for that. Just as with the Zimmerman case, she overcharged. And how is Dunn getting at least 75 years, not justice? He got a LIFE SENTENCE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 As a 5'3" 62 year old woman, I have a couple of guns, one a revolver and one a semi-auto pistol. I have different types of ammo, for practice with both, hollow point, and frangible for inside.  Dunn was correctly convicted and hopefully when he's retried on the 1st charge, they will correctly charge 2nd degree.  I'm guessing the 2nd degree attempted murder convictions will run concurrent, along with the firing into a car conviction.  If he's tried and convicted of 2nd degree murder for Davis' death, I'm hoping that that sentence will run consecutively to the other sentences. So that sentence would be on top of the other sentences. Because it comes after the first trial, he'd serve the other sentences first, up to parole, but then still be incarcerated for the 2nd trial sentence that would run after the 1st trial sentences.  That would be a life sentence.  If all sentences run concurrently, he would be eligible for parole at some point, and it's not potentially a life sentence. It is taking away a big chunk of his life, I'll give you that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 He wasn't outright acquitted of the murder charge, so he could be tried again. Prosecution needs to correctly charge him with 2nd degree. The attempted murder charges were for 2nd degree. I think prosecutors need to start charging correctly and not overreaching with their charges. They'd get more and more accurate convictions. Politics were likely involved here. Corey didn't get the outcome she wanted in the Zimmerman case, so she tried again. She's an idiot.Lady: he's not getting parole. He's getting a minimum of 20 years for each of the 3 attempted murder charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Can one of the many people trying to claim that this is somehow the fault of the prosecution, please explain to me how the fact that "Murder 1" was one of the choices, somehow caused at least one juror to vote "Not Guilty" to Manslaughter? I mean, I think Murder 1 was inappropriate. (In fact, having thought about it, I think the judge should have tossed that charge, before he even sent the jury to deliberations. On the grounds that, even if the accused did every single thing that the prosecution says he did, that's still not Murder 1.) But just because I don;t think Murder 1 should have been there, doesn't cause me to say "therefore I must vote to completely exonerate him for the person he killed." ---------- Nah, only way I can see somebody voting to acquit for the killing, is because somebody bought the notion that "if there's the slightest, remote chance that it might be self defense, then he must be not guilty of all charges". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 I think it complicated and confused the basic facts and distracted from the case. If a juror becomes convinced it is clearly not premeditated nor with malice(because the facts are not there to support it) you take away from the lower charge and can create a justification in a jurors mind of prosecutor abuse.  It made the jury instruction and the case much more difficult than needed.....for no benefit but scoring political points.  I think she is a idiot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 Can one of the many people trying to claim that this is somehow the fault of the prosecution, please explain to me how the fact that "Murder 1" was one of the choices, somehow caused at least one juror to vote "Not Guilty" to Manslaughter? I mean, I think Murder 1 was inappropriate. (In fact, having thought about it, I think the judge should have tossed that charge, before he even sent the jury to deliberations. On the grounds that, even if the accused did every single thing that the prosecution says he did, that's still not Murder 1.) But just because I don;t think Murder 1 should have been there, doesn't cause me to say "therefore I must vote to completely exonerate him for the person he killed." ---------- Nah, only way I can see somebody voting to acquit for the killing, is because somebody bought the notion that "if there's the slightest, remote chance that it might be self defense, then he must be not guilty of all charges". Technically, it can be Murder 1, since premeditation can be formed in an instance. However, anyone with any common sense knows that Dunn OR Zimmerman should have never been charged with Murder 1.I don't know why anyone is surprised at the outcome. The jury nailed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Technically, it can be Murder 1, since premeditation can be formed in an instant. Yes, I've seen that claim made. And I don't believe it for an instant. I think that's a line that's been made up by over eager prosecutors, trying to redefine a law, so they can charge people with bigger crimes. (Maybe if I knew more about the law than my opinion, my opinion would be different. But that's what it is.) Â However, anyone with any common sense knows that Dunn OR Zimmerman should have never been charged with Murder 1. Now, THERE, we agree. Â I don't know why anyone is surprised at the outcome. The jury nailed it. Disagree strongly. He intended to kill. And it wasn't self defense. (He may well have thought it was. Although his actions make me wonder even about that. But it's possible.) Edit: At least based on the really limited information I've seen. Maybe there's more, that the jury saw. I doubt it, but it's possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 Yes, I've seen that claim made. And I don't believe it for an instant. I think that's a line that's been made up by over eager prosecutors, trying to redefine a law, so they can charge people with bigger crimes. (Maybe if I knew more about the law than my opinion, my opinion would be different. But that's what it is.) Now, THERE, we agree. Disagree strongly. He intended to kill. And it wasn't self defense. (He may well have thought it was. Although his actions make me wonder even about that. But it's possible.) Edit: At least based on the really limited information I've seen. Maybe there's more, that the jury saw. I doubt it, but it's possible. I think it's pretty obvious that there were probably 2 females that were hell bent on guilty across the board, but the sane jurors weren't having it. So they were hung on count one.It doesn't matter. He got a life sentence. To say justice wasn't served, is incorrect. He should have never been charged with Murder 1 in the first place. They need to find a new DA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 So was the Jury basically in essence saying "You killed Davis in self defense, but firing those extra bullets at the rest of the kids in the truck was overboard?" Â is that the message they are sending? Â Â The fact that anyone bought his BS line of self defense in the first place is more troubling than anything else IMO. Â Anyone know the demographics of the jury? Â Not to compare this to the TM trial AGAIN, but if you remember after that trial was over, the one Juror member seemed to basically go on a media tour and it seemed like she was convinced from the beginning that Zimmerman was acting in self defense and nothing could/would detour her. Â Â I'm interested to hear from any of the jurors, exactly what evidence it is that they felt showed the guy was acting in self defense, other than his own testimony which was all sorts of contradictory to what others said of the incident. Â Justice was served in the sense that he will likely be in jail for the rest of his life, but at the same time if you are the parents of Davis, the fact that he is not guilty of murdering your son is still a lot to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 a acquittal on davis's death would have been saying that....which is not what they did. Â Failing to reach a verdict on Davis simply means the prosecution did not present a good enough case to convict...or they were confused(which is the same thing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 TWA, Â ok gotcha, for some reason I got tripped up reading all the post-verdict posts. Â So they didn't acquit, they were just undecided/hung on the Davis murder. Â So in other words, the guy will be in jail for life, and can still be tried again for whatever count they give to the Davis murder itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 TWA, ok gotcha, for some reason I got tripped up reading all the post-verdict posts. So they didn't acquit, they were just undecided/hung on the Davis murder. So in other words, the guy will be in jail for life, and can still be tried again for whatever count they give to the Davis murder itself. Yeah, they were hung on the first count. Corey already said they will try him again on Murder 1 if the Davis family wants to. He's getting life already. Why put yourself through another trial? Imagine if he isnt convicted a second time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 a acquittal on davis's death would have been saying that....which is not what they did. Failing to reach a verdict on Davis simply means the prosecution did not present a good enough case to convict...or they were confused(which is the same thing) A hung jury on Davis' death DOES say that ONE JUROR thought exactly that. That killing Davis was completely justified. Not that "murder 1 was a reach". That killing Davis was not illegal at all. ---------- TWA, ok gotcha, for some reason I got tripped up reading all the post-verdict posts. So they didn't acquit, they were just undecided/hung on the Davis murder. The entire jury didn't acquit, one juror did. (Or at least one.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 .It doesn't matter. He got a life sentence. To say justice wasn't served, is incorrect. He should have never been charged with Murder 1 in the first place. They need to find a new DA.Like your initials, this is BS. If there hadn't been anyone else in the car or if he killed them all, he walks. As for the murder one charge muddying the waters, that's BS too. If you can't figure out that the prosecution not proving murder one means you don't automatically skip murder 2 and manslaughter then you're either too stupid to be on a jury or most likely you weren't going to vote to convict no matter what. Most likely the only reason this juror or two were all but forced to vote for a conviction on the attempted murder charge.I'm telling everyone I know in FL that the tables need to be turned. Any Black person who kills a White person deserves the same jury nullification defense whether they're guilty or not. Yeah it sucks but lets see how having the shoe on the other foot feels for a change. If the so-called justice system is a joke, then lets make it as funny as possible for everyone.Maybe then things start to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 A hung jury on Davis' death DOES say that ONE JUROR thought exactly that. That killing Davis was completely justified. Not that "murder 1 was a reach". That killing Davis was not illegal at all.    that goes beyond what I have seen....the juror could easily believe neither side proved their case  Yusuf....the same law is there for all colors....in fact it has disproportionately allowed blacks to go free.   must be a racist law huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Really. Proof please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Really. Proof please. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-10-28/opinion/ct-oped-1029-guns-20131029_1_ground-laws-blacks-ground-defense  Who benefits from the law? Actually, since poor blacks who live in high-crime urban areas are the most likely victims of crime, they are also the ones who benefit the most from stand your ground laws. The laws make it easier for would-be victims to protect themselves when the police can't arrive fast enough. Therefore, rules that make self-defense more difficult disproportionately impact blacks. Blacks make up 16.6 percent of Florida's population but account for 31 percent of the defendants invoking the stand your ground defense. Black defendants who invoke this statute are actually acquitted 8 percentage points more frequently than whites who use this very same defense. Those who conclude the law is racially biased point to data compiled by the Tampa Bay Tribune, which collected 112 cases where people charged with murder relied on Florida's stand your ground law, from the first cases in 2006 to July 24 of this year. The Tribune's "shocking" claim: 72 percent of those who killed a black person faced no penalty compared to 59 percent of those who killed a white. But this doesn't tell the whole story as blacks are overwhelmingly killed by other blacks. Thus, it is also true that blacks claiming self-defense under the stand your ground law are convicted at a lower rate than are whites. About 69 percent of blacks raising the stand your Ground defense were not convicted compared to 62 percent of whites.  you can tell your people to put their fate in a jury's hands...I'll tell mine to think before they shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Can't believe it took them 4 days to reach this verdict.   Retry the asshole on Murder 2, make sure he never again sees the light of day as a free man and be done with him.  What a RIDICULOUS tragedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 Can't believe it took them 4 days to reach this verdict. Retry the asshole on Murder 2, make sure he never again sees the light of day as a free man and be done with him. What a RIDICULOUS tragedy. The DA already stated they are going to try him again for Murder 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.