Teenager shot dead after playing loud music

[fskimospy]

Based on Geosurface's blatantly racist rant above, I'd say he's already having his.

Yeah, it has been pretty interesting to watch him become more and more invested as time goes on. If you look at his early posts and compare them to his current ones it is pretty clear that his emotions are spiraling out of control on this issue.

The thing is that he has a pretty consistent history of saying racist things on here. I genuinely don't get why he doesn't go find a board that shares his views.

 

[Vic]

Prove he's lying about the events that forced him to fire in self defense.

And no, somebody saying I deserved a good ass kicking does not lawfully allow deadly force.

But what absolutely does is multiple yelling aggressive verbal threats to life or great bodily harm and action to imminently carry out that threat as was shown by the evidence at trial.

There was no evidence provided at trial that Dunn was threatened except for his own testimony. In fact, just prior to Dunn's testimony, Judge Healey ruled that he would not give the jury the self defense instruction at that time. Which is why Dunn took the stand.

 

[spidey07]

There was no evidence provided at trial that Dunn was threatened except for his own testimony. In fact, just prior to Dunn's testimony, Judge Healey ruled that he would not give the jury the self defense instruction at that time. Which is why Dunn took the stand.

So you do admit there was evidence provided at the trial of Dunn's verbal threats and actions to act on that threat?
(Now couple that with bullet trajectories showing open door, testimony of people in car of Davis's escalation and aggressiveness, cursing at Mr. Dunn angrily, attempting to open door to carry out his threats on Mr. Dunn's life ALL of which back up the testimony by the esteemed Mr. Dunn)

So...what do you have to dispute this evidence?

You do understand correctly that verbal threats with the capability/ability to carry those threats to life or bodily harm are justification for deadly force, right? Self defense is to STOP the imminent commission of a forcible felony. When somebody says "I'm going to commit a forcible felony on you right now!" and makes an action to do so deadly force is justified. One need not wait for the forcible felony to occur, one is allowed to stop the imminent commission of one. Davis communicated, yelled, cursed and told Mr. Dunn he was going to kill him. You do know that killing or beating the shit out of somebody is a forcible felony, right?

Do you honestly believe Davis was not going to imminently commit a forcible felony on the victim Mr. Dunn? Because the evidence totally dismisses that.

Don't want to get shot? Don't threaten to kill somebody and then make a move like you intend to carry out that very real capable, credible and imminent threat.

 

[Retro Rob]

It was Jordan Davis who brought the only source of anger, conflict, or problem into all of this.

How? By demanding Dunn to turn down his music?

lol

 

[Vic]

Latest update: the jurors have requested the gas station video, all 20 minutes and from all 6 cameras

 

[Vic]

So you do admit there was evidence provided at the trial of Dunn's verbal threats and actions to act on that threat?
(Now couple that with bullet trajectories showing open door, testimony of people in car of Davis's escalation and aggressiveness, cursing at Mr. Dunn angrily, attempting to open door to carry out his threats on Mr. Dunn's life ALL of which back up the testimony by the esteemed Mr. Dunn)

So...what do you have to dispute this evidence?

Did you actually read what I posted before you quoted and replied to it?

Also, a question: I don't recall that you're in the habit of referring to murder suspects as "the esteemed." Is there a particular reason that is motivating you to do that now?

Oops, just saw your edit and have only one response: shut the fuck up you lying cowardly little pussy.

 

[HumblePie]

Ummm.....no, the ME isn't guessing as to how the bullet entered and tracked. During an autopsy, a bullet's track is easily seen, but most people don't want to see the grisly pics that'd show it. But the X-ray shows the entry and final resting point of the bullet, which demonstrates the bullet's track through the body almost as well as showing autopsy pics.

And if the bullet struck no bone through it's travel in the body, again easily noted during the autopsy, then the only plausible explanation is that the body had to be leaning a certain way to get that bullet track. It certainly couldn't have happened with the victim standing unless the bullet struck bone, like the hip or ileac crest of the hip, and then ricocheted upward, which didn't happen.

The defense had every right to bring in their own experts to discount/disqualify the ME's testimony, yet they didn't. You don't find that odd? And why didn't the defense do that? Maybe because there's no defense against facts?

Expert testimony in court is effing expensive. Not everyone can afford that and it's not given out for free by the state either. Lack of experts on the defense side doesn't mean squat.

 

[spidey07]

Did you actually read what I posted before you quoted and replied to it?

Also, a question: I don't recall that you're in the habit of referring to murder suspects as "the esteemed." Is there a particular reason that is motivating you to do that now?

I have a soft spot for victims of violent crime. Even higher esteem when they save their own life.

I know your ilk. You'd rather the woman get raped than actually defend herself.

Hypothetical - if a man told a woman "I'm going to drag you into the woods and rape you" and made a move towards her is she allowed to use deadly force before he even touches her?

The answer is yes of course.

 

[HumblePie]

What a fucking load of shit. He was in such a state of shock that he drove for a long time, had dinner, had some drinks and then slept for the night. Not once did he call the police.

He shot people, then ran for it hoping that nothing would happen. Also "idiotic liberalism" is apparently being unable to kill black people at will, the America that geosurface yearns to return too.

He originally didn't know he hit anyone or killed anyone at the scene until the next morning. Then he acted stupid by not calling the cops for sure right then and there. But that is a side issue and not what is on trial nor does it really matter towards the outcome of the trial.

 

[Vic]

I have a soft spot for victims of violent crime. Even higher esteem when they save their own life.

First, no you don't. Second, regardless of what the verdict is, Dunn was not a victim of any violent crime.
You're just a lying little tool.

 

[spidey07]

First, no you don't. Second, regardless of what the verdict is, Dunn was not a victim of any violent crime.
You're just a lying little tool.

Assault and terroristic threatening are crimes.

 

[Vic]

Expert testimony in court is effing expensive. Not everyone can afford that and it's not given out for free by the state either. Lack of experts on the defense side doesn't mean squat.

Dunn's daddy is footing the bill for his defense.

 

[Vic]

Assault and terroristic threatening are crimes.

Once again, zero evidence. In this case, not even from Dunn's testimony.

 

[HumblePie]

For those wondering how the shots were done from Dunns angle.

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...1e2-bb64-001a4bcf6878/51e58b5d2ee13.image.jpg

Is a good example of what it would look like close to Dunn's position. The only bullet that went through to hit anyone was the back grouping of three and the top bullet. Which can be seen as the only whole with a dowel in that door going all the way through in this image.

http://www.news4jax.com/image/view/...40/-/i94rf0z/-/DavisSUV-trajectories3-jpg.jpg

If Davis was sitting and the bullet managed to keep a straight path, the bullet would have hit him in the upper chest or even as high as the neck.

If Davis was attempting to get out and still was partially standing in the SUV with his body close to the door, as some people get out of a higher lift vehicle, the bullet would have hit him just below the rib cage. If the bullet had been deflected by the door enough to have a path upwards, it would have gone straight through his body as it did.

Since both pictures show that Dunn could not have made those shots had the door not been open, it's the most logical deduction to make in this case.

 

[HumblePie]

Dunn's daddy is footing the bill for his defense.

Is he made of unlimited funds?

 

[Vic]

I have a soft spot for victims of violent crime. Even higher esteem when they save their own life.

I know your ilk. You'd rather the woman get raped than actually defend herself.

Hypothetical - if a man told a woman "I'm going to drag you into the woods and rape you" and made a move towards her is she allowed to use deadly force before he even touches her?

The answer is yes of course.

Absolutely she would be allowed to defend herself. As I am a fervent supporter of both gun rights and women's rights, I would never say or think differently. As you already know that from my posts, you're just lying yet again. (For the record, my wife carries at my insistence).
And if she killed the would - be rapist, and ran off 180 miles to be forcibly apprehended by the police the next day, and then there was no evidence at trial but her own testimony, you would be arguing on here about how "the esteemed Mr would be rapist" was a good man and how that "bitch slut" deserved the chair.
Everyone knows this about you, spidey, so I'm surprised you even went there with this hypothetical.

 

[Daverino]

Dunn parked his car aligned with the rear door of the SUV, not the front. This is confirmed by his testimony.

If we was parked aligned with the front door of the SUV the following things could not have happened.

1. When he rolled down the window to ask, 'Can you turn the radio down' and 'Are you talking about me?' he could not address anyone because the front window was rolled up throughout.
2. He could not have seen both passengers in the back of the SUV.
3. He could not have seen directly through the rear of SUV.
4. He could not have shot the rear door while holding his gun as he described.
5. He could not have seen the passenger next to Jordan Davis 'scowl' at him.
6. He could not have heard Jordan Davis with his window up.

If you earnestly believe Davis opened the door, you have to dismiss as a lie much of his testimony about the shooting and the contents of his letter. As pointed out over and over by the prosecution, Dunn's own statements contradict themselves.

It's up to the jury to decide whether Dunn's inconsistent testimony impeaches his credibility.

 

[spidey07]

Absolutely she would be allowed to defend herself. As I am a fervent supporter of both gun rights and women's rights, I would never say or think differently. As you already know that from my posts, you're just lying yet again. (For the record, my wife carries at my insistence).
And if she killed the would - be rapist, and ran off 180 miles to be forcibly apprehended by the police the next day, and then there was no evidence at trial but her own testimony, you would be arguing on here about how "the esteemed Mr would be rapist" was a good man and how that "bitch slut" deserved the chair.
Everyone knows this about you, spidey, so I'm surprised you even went there with this hypothetical.

That's not how it works. What happened afterward has nothing to do with the actual actions/threat and self defense. You need to let go of your white guilt and face reality.

You would still have to disprove self defense. So far you haven't done that and neither has the prosecution.

Now the 3 shots afterwards towards the vehicle? Yeah, they can nail Mr. Dunn for that. Every bullet has a lawyer attached to it and all. But killing Davis is obviously self defense as shown by the evidence.

 

[Paratus]

Yeah, it has been pretty interesting to watch him become more and more invested as time goes on. If you look at his early posts and compare them to his current ones it is pretty clear that his emotions are spiraling out of control on this issue.

The thing is that he has a pretty consistent history of saying racist things on here. I genuinely don't get why he doesn't go find a board that shares his views.

I'll point out in some thread, maybe this one, he said he was a mod for a fairly popular board with a fairly narrow user base, or something like that. I assumed he was referring to one of "those" boards that share his view. Probably rhymes with dormgrunt.

 

[Vic]

Dunn's testimony is that he was pulled up with his driver's door at the level of the rear door of the SUV. He fired 3 shots at the rear door from the driver's seat of his car. Pause and the SUV began backing out the spot. 3 more shots, the angle of each consistent with the reversing vehicle. Then further pause, Dunn exits his car, the SUV completes backing out and is now accelerating away, 4 more shots at the right rear of the SUV.
This is the evidence.

 

[Daverino]

Dunn's testimony is that he was pulled up with his driver's door at the level of the rear door of the SUV. He fired 3 shots at the rear door from the driver's seat of his car. Pause and the SUV began backing out the spot. 3 more shots, the angle of each consistent with the reversing vehicle. Then further pause, Dunn exits his car, the SUV completes backing out and is now accelerating away, 4 more shots at the right rear of the SUV.
This is the evidence.

Yup. Exactly this. Multiple eyewitnesses corroborate it as well.

In Dunn's testimony on the stand he does state originally that he is even with the front door. However, everything he states thereafter is consistent with him being even with the back door.

I'm sorry for everyone who didn't bother to watch the testimony or read the statements yet feel informed enough to post about it here.

 

[They Live]

Yeah, it has been pretty interesting to watch him become more and more invested as time goes on. If you look at his early posts and compare them to his current ones it is pretty clear that his emotions are spiraling out of control on this issue.

The thing is that he has a pretty consistent history of saying racist things on here. I genuinely don't get why he doesn't go find a board that shares his views.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure he's argued in the past that he believes blacks are genetically predisposed to violent crime. If that's the case, that could explain his views and biases.

 

[MrPickins]

He originally didn't know he hit anyone or killed anyone at the scene until the next morning. Then he acted stupid by not calling the cops for sure right then and there. But that is a side issue and not what is on trial nor does it really matter towards the outcome of the trial.

On the contrary, It matters a great deal. It hurts his credibility greatly, and when the whole defense rests on his testimony, that can be a big factor.

 

[Paratus]

First, no you don't. Second, regardless of what the verdict is, Dunn was not a victim of any violent crime.
You're just a lying little tool.

Well except if they are gay. Right Spidey?

I came to this conclusion through my own experience with gay friends when I was younger and way more liberal. Overtime I came to learn it's wrong, they're wrong, their behavior is wrong. Once a few of them started hitting on me and I beat the shit out of two of them I wanted nothing to do with gays anymore. It's wrong.

Of course according to his own words in this thread his gay friends could have shot him and it would have been a good shoot since he was committing a forcible felony at the time.

 

[Vic]

That's not how it works. What happened afterward has nothing to do with the actual actions/threat and self defense. You need to let go of your white guilt and face reality.

You would still have to disprove self defense. So far you haven't done that and neither has the prosecution.

Now the 3 shots afterwards towards the vehicle? Yeah, they can nail Mr. Dunn for that. Every bullet has a lawyer attached to it and all. But killing Davis is obviously self defense as shown by the evidence.

I have no white guilt. If Davis were white, I would have the same opinion. It's just that, unlike you, I have not self identified with the angry white male involved in this trial.

I will say it again for hundredth time. There is NO evidence that Dunn was threatened except for his testimony. Which means that, in order to believe he acted in self-defense, you have to believe him. And his actions after the incident, along with the inconsistencies in his testimony, create more than a reasonable doubt in my mind as to his credibility.

I feel like we've made a breakthrough that at least you're finally able to admit that the final shots (there were actually 4, one of them missed the SUV), fired at persons who could not have threatened him and who were fleeing the scene, could not have been in self-defense.