Teenager shot dead after playing loud music

[Geosurface]

the DJ's race should be irrelevant

Should be, but in a multiracial society race is never irrelevant, unfortunately.

In this case, the reason I drew attention to it is to counter any undercurrent in anyone's mind of "Oh suuuure, racist southern white guy and his racist southern white friends/family at the wedding are circling the wagons and covering for him. He was probably completely drunk" which might be in someone's mind without them even realizing it.

But when they know that the DJ who was hired to be there rather than a friend/family, and who was black so not part of any racial wagon-circling enclave, also said he didn't seem to have had much to drink, I think it carries more weight. Hence me mentioning it in the way I did.

how many wedding receptions have you been to where someone monitored your alcohol consumption?

I've never drank and have only been to a couple of wedding receptions. But my understanding of this is that cops would routinely ask people "and did you notice if he was drinking much?" in a situation like this, and if these same people who said they didn't see him drinking much had said they DID you'd be using it right now to bolster your point about his BAC. I think it is illuminating that nobody saw him drinking much.

Why do you keep making up stories?

Me? I see a lot of people here who are saying basically "his behavior cannot possibly be explained in any benign way, and there is no scenario where what he's claiming makes sense" - my response both as someone who probably leans a bit toward believing Dunn here, and also just as someone who likes doing the devil's advocate thing, is to put forth scenarios and hypotheticals which COULD, contrary to their assertions, make the pieces fit together.

This is what the prosecutor does too, tries to fit all the evidence together to create a malevolent picture which ends with Dunn in prison. I'm trying to do the opposite for balance.

 

[Catriona]

Should be, but in a multiracial society race is never irrelevant, unfortunately.

In this case, the reason I drew attention to it is to counter any undercurrent in anyone's mind of "Oh suuuure, racist southern white guy and his racist southern white friends/family at the wedding are circling the wagons and covering for him. He was probably completely drunk" which might be in someone's mind without them even realizing it.

But when they know that the DJ who was hired to be there rather than a friend/family, and who was black so not part of any racial wagon-circling enclave, also said he didn't seem to have had much to drink, I think it carries more weight. Hence me mentioning it in the way I did.



I've never drank and have only been to a couple of wedding receptions.



Me? I see a lot of people here who are saying basically "his behavior cannot possibly be explained in any benign way, and there is no scenario where what he's claiming makes sense" - my response both as someone who probably leans a bit toward believing Dunn here, and also just as someone who likes doing the devil's advocate thing, is to put forth scenarios and hypotheticals which COULD, contrary to their assertions, make the pieces fit together.

This is what the prosecutor does too, tries to fit all the evidence together to create a malevolent picture which ends with Dunn in prison. I'm trying to do the opposite for balance.

No, honey, that's not what you're doing. And you know it as well as I do.

So what's your deal in this thread about multiracial societies? Are you saying there shouldn't be those? Because if you are, you're a few thousand years too late.

 

[Geosurface]

No, honey, that's not what you're doing. And you know it as well as I do.

Actually, it is. And I think I'll retain my status as the resident expert on what my motives and goals are, thanks.

So what's your deal in this thread about multiracial societies? Are you saying there shouldn't be those? Because if you are, you're a few thousand years too late.

We shouldn't get off on that tangent here, I'll just say that you're right, these are a fact of our planet and have been forever. What I'm saying is that deliberately setting a course for being an even more multiracial/multicultural society is asking for more division and misunderstanding and problems like worrying about the racial composition of juries, etc. I don't think societies should SEEK to be more divided than they already are. That's all.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Okay, Geo, aside from the fact that the DJ's race should be irrelevant, how many wedding receptions have you been to where someone monitored your alcohol consumption?

Whether or not he knew he killed someone, he knew he fired his gun. And yet he took off. That's a drive by, is it not? Not cool for someone with a CCP.

Do you have any issues with gucci mane dumping a magazine of bullets into someone and not calling the cops?

 

[Catriona]

Actually, it is. And I think I'll retain my status as the resident expert on what my motives and goals are, thanks.



We shouldn't get off on that tangent here, I'll just say that you're right, these are a fact of our planet and have been forever. What I'm saying is that deliberately setting a course for being an even more multiracial/multicultural society is asking for more division and misunderstanding and problems like worrying about the racial composition of juries, etc. I don't think societies should SEEK to be more divided than they already are. That's all.

Okay, Geo. You just keep right on believing that no one here sees who you are and what your agenda is. You've been kind to me since I showed up here, so I'm not going to push it.

But your rationalizations are loud and clear.

Good night.

 

[Geosurface]

Okay, Geo. You just keep right on believing that no one here sees who you are and what your agenda is. You've been kind to me since I showed up here, so I'm not going to push it.

But your rationalizations are loud and clear.

Good night.

You're underestimating how complex people are and overestimating how evil I am.

But don't worry you're far from alone. There are tons of people on this board who, if you disagree with them on some very fundamental things about our world, they will forever interpret everything you say from that point on as being some sort of deception, misrepresentation, attempt at subterfuge or trolling or whatever.

I wish people here could just accept that different people have different views, and when they express themselves they are usually just trying to convey those views, not mess with anyone's head.

But I suppose that's too much to hope for.

Good night.

 

[TerryMathews]

The last one bothers me the most as well.

It bothers me as well.

 

[Geosurface]

It bothers me as well.

Same here. The fact that he drove off and didn't call cops indicates that a scenario where he just simply snapped might be more likely.

It isn't definitive, but I think it is telling.

People probably think I am really confident in Dunn's innocence, but I'm absolutely not. I'm nearly 50/50 on this. At times I've been much higher, but toward his guilt not his innocence.

I've started watching the trial on YouTube.

 

[mugs]

This doesn't sound like it's a cut and dry case. As I suspected the defense is going after the fact that the other teens had the time to stash a weapon and the fact the police didn't secure/search the area for several days.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/06/justice/florida-loud-music-murder-trial/

Reading the media's account, including opinions and misrepresentations by the defense attorney, it's understandable that you'd reach that conclusion. If you read the discovery documents though, the defense is grasping at straws.

 

[Geosurface]

Observations so far having just listened to John Guy give his opening (same guy who did the prosecution opening for Zimmerman case):

Seems even the prosecution agrees that Jordan Davis was the first one to get upset and yell "fuck that n____r!" in reference to Dunn. And the prosecution also seems to acknowledge that the initial request to turn down the music was made politely by Dunn.

"Can you turn down the music? I can't hear myself think." - John Guy who is fond of being dramatic and doing the "f-ing punks!" thing where he repeats something someone said and makes it sound MUCH more malevolent than it actually did, didn't even do that here. He said it in a very calm way, speaking as though he was Dunn.

So the request was made calmly and politely, and even according to Guy Jordan Davis then basically flipped out.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Reading the media's account, including opinions and misrepresentations by the defense attorney, it's understandable that you'd reach that conclusion. If you read the discover documents though, the defense is grasping at straws.

It will depend on what is allowed and presented to the jury. I still think there's a 85% chance of a conviction (1st degree murder or included lesser charge), 10% chance it will end in an acquittal, and 5% chance of a hung jury.

 

[Geosurface]

Listening to defense opening - seems like the boys in the car did call people other than police but can't remember/won't say who. Seems none of the boys will testify that Dunn ever threatened them or cursed at them.

And for some reason none of the initial interviews with them were recorded in any way :| witnesses weren't separated either.

 

[Vic]

Listening to defense opening - seems like the boys in the car did call people other than police but can't remember/won't say who. Seems none of the boys will testify that Dunn ever threatened them or cursed at them.

And for some reason none of the initial interviews with them were recorded in any way :| witnesses weren't separated either.

That's because it's not customary to treat the victims of a crime as suspects.

 

[Geosurface]

That's because it's not customary to treat the victims of a crime as suspects.

In my experience they usually record all interviews with witnesses, victims, and suspects. At least audio.

 

[Vic]

In my experience they usually record all interviews with witnesses, victims, and suspects. At least audio.

And what is your experience?

Not LEO, I'm sure of that.

 

[Geosurface]

And what is your experience?

Not LEO, I'm sure of that.

My experience is as someone who observes a lot of cases.

I'm sure there is a lot of variation between police departments and states, cities, etc, but let me put it this way: what I'm really trying to say is that not recording everyone's statements is stupid and not best practices.

EDIT: And I'd also say that not separating witnesses at the gas station and letting them congregate together after police had arrived, and swap information, if that is an accurate characterization... is flat out ridiculous.

 

[Ichinisan]

If Mr. Dunn went through the training to get a CCW that begs the question(s). If after going through that training and being a responsible firearms owner why did he

• shoot at the vehicle driven by the teenagers as they were leaving?

• Leave the premises and neglect to notify the proper authorities of the shooting?

The last one bothers me the most.

Even if I accept as fact Mr. Dunn's assertion that there was a shotgun and that he was perhaps fearful of the other people at the convenience store; it still begs the question why did he not contact the police as soon as he was away from the store?

If he didn't trust the police in the town the shooting took place in why didn't he go straight to the police in his home town (approximately 160 miles away from the incident) while having his girlfriend contact his neighbor?

The fact that he apparently didn't contact the police before they tracked him down via his license plate number might be a reason his questioning wasn't on the friendliest of terms.

If he contacted law enforcement asap then they probably would be more inclined to believe his statements about the shotgun....

After all it would then be a justified shooting and there doesn't seem to be a reason not to notify LEOs when you have to engage in such an action even if you don't believe you actually hit anyone.

Wouldn't you want to report thugs who go around pointing shotguns at people who politely ask them to turn down their loud annoying music?



.....

I can't really figure out why you quoted me.

 

[Geosurface]

I can't really figure out why you quoted me.

Probably just a convenient launch point to discuss CCW responsibilities.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Actually, it is. And I think I'll retain my status as the resident expert on what my motives and goals are, thanks.



We shouldn't get off on that tangent here, I'll just say that you're right, these are a fact of our planet and have been forever. What I'm saying is that deliberately setting a course for being an even more multiracial/multicultural society is asking for more division and misunderstanding and problems like worrying about the racial composition of juries, etc. I don't think societies should SEEK to be more divided than they already are. That's all.

Concern, concern, concern. It's wonderful the amount of concern that you are able to express. Truly wonderful....

 

[Geosurface]

Concern, concern, concern. It's wonderful the amount of concern that you are able to express. Truly wonderful....

Oh for god's sake shut up.

You're like a little 12 year old who just learned a new curse word and finds an excuse to work it into every other sentence he says.

Yes yes, I know you heard about the concept of a "concern troll" at some point (seemingly) in the recent past, and now you're going to ride that concept into the ground.

If you care to refresh your memory about how it's actually defined, here you go: Concern Troll definition at RationalWiki

and if you do so you'll find that 99% of that definition doesn't even begin to remotely fit anything I say, and the other 1% is a stretch.

You do realize that just because you found out people use the term "concern troll" to indicate people who feign concern, that this doesn't mean that people don't have actual things that concern them, right?

Maybe I'll start yelling "concern troll!" at people who express worry about climate change or the economy, or gun violence, or really anything. I disagree with them on something? Good enough evidence that they are insincere! Right?

Get some new material, or better yet just be quiet.

 

[CitizenKain]

Observations so far having just listened to John Guy give his opening (same guy who did the prosecution opening for Zimmerman case):

Seems even the prosecution agrees that Jordan Davis was the first one to get upset and yell "fuck that n____r!" in reference to Dunn. And the prosecution also seems to acknowledge that the initial request to turn down the music was made politely by Dunn.

"Can you turn down the music? I can't hear myself think." - John Guy who is fond of being dramatic and doing the "f-ing punks!" thing where he repeats something someone said and makes it sound MUCH more malevolent than it actually did, didn't even do that here. He said it in a very calm way, speaking as though he was Dunn.

So the request was made calmly and politely, and even according to Guy Jordan Davis then basically flipped out.

Turns out being rude to a racist drunk guy is not an offense punishable by death.

 

[Geosurface]

Turns out being rude to a racist drunk guy is not an offense punishable by death.

Agreed.

Threatening someone's life may legally permit them to defend it, though.

It remains to be determined (and from our POV probably never will be definitively) whether such a threat was made in addition to simply being rude.

Davis' best friend apparently initially said that Davis had been opening the door to get out at the time he was yelling at Dunn. Story seems to have changed later.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Oh for god's sake shut up.

You're like a little 12 year old who just learned a new curse word and finds an excuse to work it into every other sentence he says.

[snip: blah, blah, blah]

Get some new material, or better yet just be quiet.

Have you made up your mind about the Holocaust yet or are you still asking 'questions'?

 

[mugs]

Agreed.

Threatening someone's life may legally permit them to defend it, though.

It remains to be determined (and from our POV probably never will be definitively) whether such a threat was made in addition to simply being rude.

Davis' best friend apparently initially said that Davis had been opening the door to get out at the time he was yelling at Dunn. Story seems to have changed later.

When did he say that? IIRC from their interviews, they all said that the child locks on the SUV were always enabled.

 

[Geosurface]

When did he say that? IIRC from their interviews, they all said that the child locks on the SUV were always enabled.

The defense attorney said that Davis' best friend initially had told police that Davis was grabbing the handle or starting to open the door or something like that, I don't know what evidence he has that that was said given that the cops didn't record those interviews, but I feel pretty confident that he has some evidence of it (perhaps a detective's written report or something) which will come out later in the trial.

They didn't say anything about child locks until a few days later and the cops found that the locks were NOT enabled. As for them knowing they were "always enabled" (which doesn't make sense for a young man who is driving around with other young men btw, child locks don't automatically disable when the cark is parked so he'd have to be unlocking it for his passengers every time they all got out? not believable) - two of them had only been in that truck once before, so they wouldn't have been in a position to know what was "always" enabled in it.