Teenager shot dead after playing loud music

[Pens1566]

Trying to find issue with someone fleeing the scene after being shot at repeatedly is ok, but the shooter leaving and driving several hours away without contacting authorities is no problem. Interesting.

 

[HumblePie]

I agree what makes sense is driving hundreds of miles without notifying the police of what happened.

Oh, and ordering a pizza.

Innocent people flee the scene and never return, this is common knowledge. And they called 911 to report it too?!? Hells yeah, they gotta be guilty.

Nice strawman. I was not talking about the inconsistencies with Dunn's actions. Nor am I defending Dunn with my statements about the inconsistencies of the actions taken by the teenagers.

 

[QueBert]

Nice strawman. I was not talking about the inconsistencies with Dunn's actions. Nor am I defending Dunn with my statements about the inconsistencies of the actions taken by the teenagers.

I've been shot at, and I can only speak for me. But, it left me shook up and I sort of spaced out. I waited almost 30 minutes before I called the cops. It tends to throw people off a bit, unless these "Durango Thugs" have experience with getting shot at, I'll give them leeway for how they reacted. Nothing they did seems the least bit unreasonable for people who had just been FUCKING SHOT AT.

 

[mugs]

If the teens are only 400 feet away from the scene they left in the adjacent parking lot strip mall, an ambulance could just as easily get there as it could the gas station. Driving back those 400 feet make no sense if you are waiting for an ambulance. And to go into the same spot they left from? Why not just stop at the edge of the parking lot for the gas station to make it easier for emergency crews to access them instead of a parking spot next to the building entrance.

Returning to the scene if innocent makes no sense, especially if they were already on the line with 911. Now if the 911 operator told them to return... that makes logical sense, but that is evidence we do not have at this point.

Jesus tap-dancing Christ now you're suspicious of their choice of parking spot? Beyond the pale.

 

[BUTCH1]

Jesus tap-dancing Christ now you're suspicious of their choice of parking spot? Beyond the pale.

It's mind-boggling the level of denial in this thread, a dude puts 9 slugs into a car, hauls ass, has to be located and apprehended via his tag#, whips up a "I saw a shotgun" story AFTER he's arrested yet the some here are so lame and full of hate the HAVE to try and find a reason he's not a killer. The TM/GZ case has a lot of unknowns and is greatly debatable, but this is so cut and dried it's pathetic,fess up, he blew a gasket when he was told to F-off and opened up on an occupied vehicle, then fled the murder scene without calling the cops. This man should face the death penalty plain and simple..

 

[Vic Vega]

It's mind-boggling the level of denial in this thread, a dude puts 9 slugs into a car, hauls ass, has to be located and apprehended via his tag#, whips up a "I saw a shotgun" story AFTER he's arrested yet the some here are so lame and full of hate the HAVE to try and find a reason he's not a killer. The TM/GZ case has a lot of unknowns and is greatly debatable, but this is so cut and dried it's pathetic,fess up, he blew a gasket when he was told to F-off and opened up on an occupied vehicle, then fled the murder scene without calling the cops. This man should face the death penalty plain and simple..

I'm a gun owner and gun rights supporter and I agree with you.

 

[HumblePie]

Jesus tap-dancing Christ now you're suspicious of their choice of parking spot? Beyond the pale.

I'm doing what any good investigator would do. Look at the actions, and try to find justification of actions based off various contexts.

There is a series of actions taken by both sides. In this we are only talking about the side of the teens. We can discuss what Dunn did or didn't do if you want in another post. I am happy to do so. Still, this is about the teens.

They drove off after being shot at. They were on the phone when driving off. They stopped in a parking lot in an adjacent strip mall north of the gas station at the intersection of those two streets.

Two individuals (two of the 4 teens) were seen by a witness to exit the vehicle. One circled the car. Both were talking on the phone.

Both teens reentered the vehicle and drove back to the gas station. The driver went to the exact spot they had vacated when fleeing from the gun fire from Dunn.


Those are the actions that we as the public know taken during that incident by the teens. Could it all have been innocuous? Sure. Some of the actions are a bit weird to do, but doesn't mean an innocent person wouldn't do them.

As an investigator, one would have to conceive of all possible reasons for those actions. The reasons could be they were innocent, but jumpy and acting stupid. Sure it fits even if strange. Another assumption that can be made is that the teens had something to hide for some reason. Then some of those actions make more sense in that context. Doesn't mean that is the exact reason for those actions. But it does make a lead to be investigated.

Which would lead to the next logical question. Whom did the teens call during that time frame. If they only called 911, the the first explanation would more than likely be the correct one. If they called some friend... things get a bit more suspicious don't you think?



As for Dunn's action, he really could have miss-seen something he thought he saw. It's not like no one has done that before. A shadow or a glint off the window and his mind fills in the gap he is seeing a glimpse of some sort of weapon. If the teens were really threatening his life and started opening the door when he thought he saw a weapon.... the law still allows him to defend himself.

 

[Capt Caveman]

I'm doing what any good investigator would do. Look at the actions, and try to find justification of actions based off various contexts.

:biggrin:

As an investigator, one would have to conceive of all possible reasons for those actions. The reasons could be they were innocent, but jumpy and acting stupid. Sure it fits even if strange. Another assumption that can be made is that the teens had something to hide for some reason. Then some of those actions make more sense in that context. Doesn't mean that is the exact reason for those actions. But it does make a lead to be investigated.

Which would lead to the next logical question. Whom did the teens call during that time frame. If they only called 911, the the first explanation would more than likely be the correct one. If they called some friend... things get a bit more suspicious don't you think?

If they had something to hide, why not drive away and not come back? Yes, it makes more sense to stop to hide a shotgun which no witnesses saw then drive back. B/c the guilty always drive back to the scene of the crime.

You know, I was at the finish line and witnessed the Boston Marathon bombings. You know who I called first, my GF, not 911.

Again, you act like these kids were cool, calm and collective yet Dunn gets a pass for being irrational.

 

[HumblePie]

:biggrin:



If they had something to hide, why not drive away and not come back? Yes, it makes more sense to stop to hide a shotgun which no witnesses saw then drive back. B/c the guilty always drive back to the scene of the crime.

You know, I was at the finish line and witnessed the Boston Marathon bombings. You know who I called first, my GF, not 911.

Again, you act like these kids were cool, calm and collective yet Dunn gets a pass for being irrational.

WTF you going on about with that last sentence? You haven't read shit of what I posted if you think I'm siding with Dunn or anyone on this case. I've played Devil's Advocate to both sides here. Dunn and the teens both did stupid and questionable actions that makes their stories warrant more investigation. Which is where I have left it.

Until more evidence is forth coming there is not enough information known to the public at this time to even make a halfway decent opinion as to the guilt of Dunn.

 

[mugs]

As an investigator, one would have to conceive of all possible reasons for those actions. The reasons could be they were innocent, but jumpy and acting stupid. Sure it fits even if strange. Another assumption that can be made is that the teens had something to hide for some reason. Then some of those actions make more sense in that context. Doesn't mean that is the exact reason for those actions. But it does make a lead to be investigated.

/facepalm

Nothing about what they did was "stupid" or even unusual if they did nothing wrong.

Everything they did would be really stupid if they did have a gun. Driving a few hundred feet to leave the gun near the scene of the crime when they could have just as easily kept driving and ditched it where it wouldn't likely be found makes no sense. You refuse to acknowledge that in all of your insane ramblings about their "suspicious" behavior. What they did was the opposite of suspicious.

WTF you going on about with that last sentence? You haven't read shit of what I posted if you think I'm siding with Dunn or anyone on this case. I've played Devil's Advocate to both sides here. Dunn and the teens both did stupid and questionable actions that makes their stories warrant more investigation. Which is where I have left it.

You're "on the fence" because the evidence is so overwhelmingly in favor of Jordan Davis's innocence, but somehow you're holding onto the possibility of his guilt. Yeah, it's obvious what side you're on. You have vehemently defended the murderer and occasionally admitted that maybe the facts could suggest that the victims didn't commit any crimes.

You know, it's ok to state an opinion and then later admit that you were wrong. I'd be totally fine with everything I've said in this thread if a gun is later found, because everything I've said is based on the facts that we know now (and not the lies that spidey and his crew are spreading). You can look at the facts objectively and decide that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of one conclusion, and if evidence later comes out that proves that conclusion wrong, no one will think less of you. We're not an actual jury, we're stating opinions based on the known facts and it's ok to be wrong (but it's not ok to lie about the facts, spidey's cross burning crew).

 

[soundforbjt]

Yep, they dumped the shotgun, and FIFTY COPS couldn't find it...

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Yep, they dumped the shotgun, and FIFTY COPS couldn't find it...

This is what happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojTKkfgvwvU&t=0m12s

 

[soundforbjt]

A felony is a damned serious crime. That's why it's classified as a felony.

Unless it's a CCW holder committing one right?

 

[BUTCH1]

I'm a gun owner and gun rights supporter and I agree with you.

I don't have a gun (yet) but I do support the right to buy one if I so desire, my neighborhood has gone to crap the last 10 yrs or so, It's an option I'm considering..

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I don't have a gun (yet) but I do support the right to buy one if I so desire, my neighborhood has gone to crap the last 10 yrs or so, It's an option I'm considering..

Sounds like you need to move.

 

[SheHateMe]

Yep, they dumped the shotgun, and FIFTY COPS couldn't find it...

That's because they covered it up with an invisibility cloak.

 

[QueBert]

What I find maybe most shocking about this case is Dunn's a good ole boy, so to me it's almost impossible to believe the cops were unable to find the shotgun. Mind you I know there wasn't actually one to find, but that's never stopped it from still happening in countless other cases.

 

[BUTCH1]

Sounds like you need to move.

I would if I could, long story. I have no problem with guns, just the people who go off on "power trips" because they are carrying one..

 

[QueBert]

This case is very fucking serious, so what the shotgun was imaginary. Dunn might not be technically lying, maybe he really did believe he saw one. What if that's the case and he's a hypochondriac? If he believed they shot him, real gun or not he could possibly die, I bet there have been hypochondraics who've died from less.

 

[BudAshes]

As for Dunn's action, he really could have miss-seen something he thought he saw. It's not like no one has done that before. A shadow or a glint off the window and his mind fills in the gap he is seeing a glimpse of some sort of weapon. If the teens were really threatening his life and started opening the door when he thought he saw a weapon.... the law still allows him to defend himself.

lol, nice trolling:thumbsup:

 

[Dr. Zaus]

As for Dunn's action, he really could have miss-seen something he thought he saw. It's not like no one has done that before. A shadow or a glint off the window and his mind fills in the gap he is seeing a glimpse of some sort of weapon. If the teens were really threatening his life and started opening the door when he thought he saw a weapon.... the law still allows him to defend himself.

The law is explicit: if someone is clearly an undesirable, then removing them from the system is an entirely justifiable action. People like that commit crimes that justify killing all the time, which tells me that they've given up their right to be "murdered persons" and thus these criminal non-persons may be removed whenever a proper community member comes across them. Even if they didn't commit the crime of scaring a white guy, they are sure to have done so in the past.

Heck, with what rap music says, i'm fairly sure just playing it is a death threat against white people; that means he had a reasonable feeling that his life was in danger, and the law allows him to defend himself.

This is still a Christian nation under God.

 

[Dari]

I'm doing what any good investigator would do. Look at the actions, and try to find justification of actions based off various contexts.

There is a series of actions taken by both sides. In this we are only talking about the side of the teens. We can discuss what Dunn did or didn't do if you want in another post. I am happy to do so. Still, this is about the teens.

They drove off after being shot at. They were on the phone when driving off. They stopped in a parking lot in an adjacent strip mall north of the gas station at the intersection of those two streets.

Two individuals (two of the 4 teens) were seen by a witness to exit the vehicle. One circled the car. Both were talking on the phone.

Both teens reentered the vehicle and drove back to the gas station. The driver went to the exact spot they had vacated when fleeing from the gun fire from Dunn.


Those are the actions that we as the public know taken during that incident by the teens. Could it all have been innocuous? Sure. Some of the actions are a bit weird to do, but doesn't mean an innocent person wouldn't do them.

As an investigator, one would have to conceive of all possible reasons for those actions. The reasons could be they were innocent, but jumpy and acting stupid. Sure it fits even if strange. Another assumption that can be made is that the teens had something to hide for some reason. Then some of those actions make more sense in that context. Doesn't mean that is the exact reason for those actions. But it does make a lead to be investigated.

Which would lead to the next logical question. Whom did the teens call during that time frame. If they only called 911, the the first explanation would more than likely be the correct one. If they called some friend... things get a bit more suspicious don't you think?



As for Dunn's action, he really could have miss-seen something he thought he saw. It's not like no one has done that before. A shadow or a glint off the window and his mind fills in the gap he is seeing a glimpse of some sort of weapon. If the teens were really threatening his life and started opening the door when he thought he saw a weapon.... the law still allows him to defend himself.

You really are a piece of shit. So if I imagined that you are threatening me, I can kill you?

 

[HumblePie]

The law is the law. You can't go around threatening the lives of others and make a reasonable fear that you will carry out those actions. Not saying Jordan and his friends did that. I do not know if they did or did not conclusively at this point. Even if no weapon is present, if Jordan and/or friends stated they were going to kill or seriously injure a person and then present the opportunity to act upon that threat, such as trying to exit the vehicle, then the law allows the person they are threatening to defend themselves. If you have a problem with how the law works then try to change it.

 

[HumblePie]

You really are a piece of shit. So if I imagined that you are threatening me, I can kill you?

Strawman much?

 

[HumblePie]

lol, nice trolling:thumbsup:

No. The point I am making is that a weapon does not need to be in possession of the kids for Dunn to lawfully use lethal force to defend himself.