General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsdoc03
(35,293 posts)IllinoisBirdWatcher
(2,315 posts)glowing
(12,233 posts)Instructions are half the battle...
They are long and to legalese for FLoriDuh.
pacalo
(24,721 posts)It doesn't make sense. Dunn knew where Jordan was seated & the shot through his door was obviously intended for him.
Diamonique
(1,655 posts)These were separate charges that had to be looked at and decided on separately.
Dunn claimed self-defense in the shooting of Jordan. Somebody on the jury believed him, voted not guilty, and wouldn't change their mind or agree to any of the lesser charges (murder 2 or manslaughter). So we get a hung jury.
There was no claim of self defense in the other shootings, so the jury didn't have any testimony or evidence to let him off on those shootings, and there was no longer any danger because the kids were driving away. So we get guilty of 2nd degree attempted murder.
okaawhatever
(9,457 posts)the jury didn't find him not guilty. The jury didn't say he didn't do it. What the jury said was, we can't come to an agreement on whether it was Murder one or two and we are unwavering in our opinions.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)If yes, it appears to not be well known.
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)world wide wally
(21,734 posts)Except for the damage to the car, of course
TheOther95Percent
(1,035 posts)I think it's reasonable to believe if someone pulls a gun and shoots, that person intends to kill. Gun courses don't teach people to shoot to wound or miss. Guns are meant to be used to kill.
spanone
(135,781 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Now I don't believe for a minute that he acted in self-defense, but that is what his defense was, so for the killing all they needed was one juror to believe that. For the attempted murder charges, the SUV was driving away at the time, so there was no threat of danger to Dunn therefore it couldn't be self-defense. Hence the guilty verdict for attempted murder.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)With different mind sets applied concerning Dunn's actions. There may have been some jurors that felt there never was any fear for his life or gun or threat at all while others may have thought that maybe there was a legitimate reason to have feared for his life with the first volley that was at Davis while the car was stopped, but the two second volleys were when the car was fleeing and when there was no longer a threat. Self-defense is defined as use of force is only justifiable if there is immediate threat to life or serious bodily harm but the use of force can only be so much that the threat is stopped. Dunn shooting at the car when it is in retreat is not justifiable self-defense especially considering no one was firing back at him. This is why Dunn said on the stand that his intention when he continued firing at the car was to keep them from firing back at him thereby attempting to make it appear that there was still a threat even though they were fleeing. However, this didn't fly with the jury because according to Dunn there was ONE person in the car with a gun making ONE person of the four a threat had he believed there was one. Firing willy nilly at the car when at no time Dunn himself said that the three other boys were not a threat makes his actions during those second and third volleys at the car as it is fleeing unjustifiable self-defense though the first volley at Davis some jurors might have believed could have been justified.
However, I still think they deadlocked on Murder 1 versus Murder 2. Some jurors likely believed as I do and everyone else seems to here that there was never any gun nor any threat at any time, and that is premeditation - Murder 1. He didn't shoot because he felt his life was threatened but because he was angry at this kid for defying him and talking back to him. For some jurors they may not have been willing to agree to lesser included charges because they emphatically believed that he first fired at Davis because he was angry with him never being justifiably threatened and been unwilling to budge off that. Had there been more than one person unwilling to budge off of Murder 1 as being the right verdict the more likely that the counts concerning Davis of Murder 1 and lesser included they couldn't come to agreement on with some being willing to go down to a lesser charge while others just wouldn't do it just to come to a guilty verdict of some kind. If I was the only holdout for Murder 1 I might agree to a Murder 2 charge, but I'd hate myself for it and believe the rest of my life that it was the wrong decision. Had there been even one more juror that felt absolutely that it was Murder 1 than I'd dig in my heels with them. I'd rather hang a jury for the right reason than agree to a lesser charge I didn't believe was the right one just to render a verdict... I have to live with what decision I make, and for me I couldn't live with myself in making a decision I emphatically didn't agree was correct. When people say why didn't they do this or that, it's easy when you aren't the one having to make that decision and live with it your own self.
This is discussed in the long discussion between the attorneys and the judge when they were trying to figure out how to answer the jury questions about self-defense...
Whoever Phipps is he hasn't been paying very close attention to this case or he would know how not absurd at all this is and why.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)He was so focused on trying to talk his way out of killing Davis he never even thought to claim the other three guys threatened him, leaving himself completely exposed to three counts of attempted murder.
edbermac
(15,933 posts)If it was 2nd degree murder charge I think they would have come back with a guilty verdict.
I found this link and it has a good definition. I'm guessing the jury had a problem with 'premeditation' for 1st degree.
2nd degree says 'intentional killing; by extremely reckless conduct' which sounds like what happened.
http://www.diffen.com/difference/First_Degree_Murder_vs_Second_Degree_Murder
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)pulling the gun, second was had gun pulled and then made a choice to kill... that kind of distinction?
edbermac
(15,933 posts)If he wrote in a diary/blog, 'I hate blacks, I'll kill the next one I come across', that sounds like premeditation, 1st degree murder.
I heard nothing that he set out to shoot anybody that day, he'd just come from a wedding. He pulled into the station, heard the loud music and escalated the situation. That sounds more like 2nd degree, 'intentional killing; by extremely reckless conduct' as I posted.
I think some jurors had a hard time with premeditation as explained to them. I think he should have been charged with 2nd degree. A slam dunk guilty verdict.
Wish we had a few lawyers here to explain it better.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)and then shoot them, that's premeditation.
in any event, the apparent cause for the mistrial is one juror insisted that it was self-defense when he shot Davis, per their questions this morning.
DallasNE
(7,402 posts)In discussing the case.
But I think I know the answer and it is found in stand your ground. Dunn claims Davis pointed a shotgun at him and so that made him fair game. There was no claim that any of the others showed a gun so after he gunned down Davis and didn't stop shooting it was attempted murder.
Keep in mind that the prosecution had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Davis did not have a gun since Dunn said that he did. Some on the jury said that it was not enough that no gun was found, Dunn didn't mention a gun to his GF as they sped away from the scene of the crime, the other 3 teens said nobody had a gun and there was no return of gunfire, especially when Dunn paused his shooting rampage. Still not enough to prove the absence of a gun. Indeed, it was likely the rounds fired after the pause that was Dunn's downfall on the attempted murder charges. Had Dunn not fired at the SUV as it pulled away Dunn probably would have walked away a free man.