GUILTY FL - Jordan Davis, 17, shot to death, Satellite Beach, 23 Nov 2012 #8

Status
Not open for further replies.

turaj

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
4,277
Reaction score
7,217
Where will Dunn live out the rest of his life?

I hope very close to a boom box with really good bass.

Car with " music" pulled up next to me today at a stop sign...I hate it too but today I just sort of laughed and went on my way realizing how really stupid it is to even pay any attention. MD says he would react the same way again if his saw his fantasy gun...hum...I doubt that I think he very much regrets what he did not because he killed Jordan but because his life is ruined and he got caught.
 

ElleElle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
7,497
Reaction score
33
You nailed it, ElleElle. In some places, guns are common place, not as a "self defense", but "in defense" of "environmental factors". "Open Carry" laws have been around in my state, Arizona, since before Arizona became a state.

Now take in consideration that Arizona has only been a State for a little over 100 years. We have many dangerous and deadly predators, ie. animals, and venomous reptiles. The state was founded on the industries of Cotton, Cattle, Copper, and Citrus, all of which put the participants in situations where they could and usually did encounter those environmental dangers. Hunting decided whether you survived.
Add to that, the Comancheros, Indians, and bandits that were still a part of the State's history the first few decades of the 1900's. Prior to that, the Mexican-American War was going on. Arizona wasn't even in existence when the Civil War was going on. Slavery wasn't even an issue and many settlers moved here just to get away from it.

I'm used to seeing holstered weapons and "long guns"in racks on the back windows of trucks. It was common place in Scottsdale where I grew up, and up here where I've lived for the past 24 years.

Native Arizonans don't see weapons as "living in fear", they see it as a "tool for safety". Don't get me wrong, there are many non-Arizonans who move here and go all "Yosemite Sam" with the legalities of guns. They usually run afoul of the Law at one point or another because they don't have a handle on gun ownership.

Guns were allowed in the County Courthouse in Yavapai County (my county) until just 15 years ago, and that only happened because some silly 16 year old decided she was going to help her boyfriend escape during his court trial.:facepalm:

Some societies can handle possessing weapons, and a lot of it has to do with the culture and respect that THAT society places on them. Other societies place "status" on the ownership of a weapon<- that's where things go bad.
JMO.

:loveyou: I love your historical breakdown! Thank you!

I have been to AZ and I was kind of shocked when I saw gun show tabloids, gun earrings.

Here in Canada, if someone broke into my home, and I shot the intruder, I would be the one charged. It is so silly.

My ex has guns and when his renewal came up, the RCMP called me as I was listed as an "ex-girlfriend" on the application.

They called to ask if I feared him and if I was aware of any psychological issues he had that should prevent him from owning guns.

I wish can "bears firearms" here.
 

zqtpie

New Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
132
Reaction score
0
You nailed it, ElleElle. In some places, guns are common place, not as a "self defense", but "in defense" of "environmental factors". "Open Carry" laws have been around in my state, Arizona, since before Arizona became a state.

Now take in consideration that Arizona has only been a State for a little over 100 years. We have many dangerous and deadly predators, ie. animals, and venomous reptiles. The state was founded on the industries of Cotton, Cattle, Copper, and Citrus, all of which put the participants in situations where they could and usually did encounter those environmental dangers. Hunting decided whether you survived.
Add to that, the Comancheros, Indians, and bandits that were still a part of the State's history the first few decades of the 1900's. Prior to that, the Mexican-American War was going on. Arizona wasn't even in existence when the Civil War was going on. Slavery wasn't even an issue and many settlers moved here just to get away from it.

I'm used to seeing holstered weapons and "long guns"in racks on the back windows of trucks. It was common place in Scottsdale where I grew up, and up here where I've lived for the past 24 years.

Native Arizonans don't see weapons as "living in fear", they see it as a "tool for safety". Don't get me wrong, there are many non-Arizonans who move here and go all "Yosemite Sam" with the legalities of guns. They usually run afoul of the Law at one point or another because they don't have a handle on gun ownership.

Guns were allowed in the County Courthouse in Yavapai County (my county) until just 15 years ago, and that only happened because some silly 16 year old decided she was going to help her boyfriend escape during his court trial.:facepalm:

Some societies can handle possessing weapons, and a lot of it has to do with the culture and respect that THAT society places on them. Other societies place "status" on the ownership of a weapon<- that's where things go bad.
JMO.

I just don't think I would like to live in an urban area where any number of people can and are carrying guns.
 

luvmygarden

New Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
843
Reaction score
2
I am so pleased they decided to not make a hasty decision on murder 1. I would much rather see a mistrial. Strolla is worried about the state spending more money lol what a laugh. They tried 5 charges in 1 trial so I would Imagine the state is not worried about getting Justice for Jordan with another trial. Wish a few other trials had a mistrial instead of what happened. That is one thing about Perry I didn't like he was always talking budget. Caylee was worth needing a bigger budget.
I thought it was funny when Strolla went to rub Dunn's arm after the jury was leaving Dunn stepped away from his hand. Now when he talks to Dunn he will see a different creature than before I bet on it.
 

ElleElle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
7,497
Reaction score
33
I did not realize that pre- meditation actually could be seconds, time to reflect. Juan Martinez explained it to the jury so well in the Arias trial that I actually understood it. Murder 1 was the correct charge IMO. If they could not agree on M1, then go down the list. If there is reasonable doubt, acquit.

I cannot speculate as to where the jury got hung up as they could have been all over the place. The fact that they could not agree, to me, implies that some thought JD provoked or was in some way responsible for his own death. In truth, had JD not engaged with Dunn in a war of words, this shooting more than likely, would have never happened.

There is a lesson here. Think before you act, whether verbal or physical. This applies to people like Dunn as well kids like Jordan. I try to tell my children, who are young adults, to not engage with drivers that cut them off, drive slowly in the left lane, don't use turn signals, flip them off, tailgate them etc. Yes it is annoying, but you never know who the inconsiderate driver is or if they have a gun. Disengage.

BBM ~ And, if you are a grown man dealing with rowdy teenagers, that's what should of happened. It is called responsibility.
 

turaj

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
4,277
Reaction score
7,217
I am so pleased they decided to not make a hasty decision on murder 1. I would much rather see a mistrial. Strolla is worried about the state spending more money lol what a laugh. They tried 5 charges in 1 trial so I would Imagine the state is not worried about getting Justice for Jordan with another trial. Wish a few other trials had a mistrial instead of what happened. That is one thing about Perry I didn't like he was always talking budget. Caylee was worth needing a bigger budget.
I thought it was funny when Strolla went to rub Dunn's arm after the jury was leaving Dunn stepped away from his hand. Now when he talks to Dunn he will see a different creature than before I bet on it.

i will have to watch again but i think i saw him turn to "daddy" and sort of shrug his shoulders like well I tried...like a little boy...that relationship is so pathetic. i did not see the son who he has basically had no relationship with in court.
 

ElleElle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
7,497
Reaction score
33
I hope very close to a boom box with really good bass.

Car with " music" pulled up next to me today at a stop sign...I hate it too but today I just sort of laughed and went on my way realizing how really stupid it is to even pay any attention. MD says he would react the same way again if his saw his fantasy gun...hum...I doubt that I think he very much regrets what he did not because he killed Jordan but because his life is ruined and he got caught.

BBM~ :floorlaugh: Too funny.

I bet he waited to call 911 because he was intoxicated. :moo:
 

Tulessa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
23,023
Reaction score
3,394
I just don't think I would like to live in an urban area where any number of people can and are carrying guns.

Walk in our shoes. If not for OUR gun , I might just be a discussion here. :seeya:


And, my brother that was murdered, HAD NO gun. :(
 

kjt300

New Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
I was astounded that two important things were not discussed more heavily in this trial.

1. I was shocked to learn the incredible short period of time between Rhonda walking into the little store and the first shots. It was like a minute and a half or some such time. It would be impossible for all of the back and forth trash talk to have occurred the way MD proposed. Just impossible. Why wasn't that more stressed?

2. Remember when the defense was going on an on about the state of mind of MD prior to the shooting? He was happy...he was thrilled... he just came from the son's wedding where he was welcomed with open arms?????

Really? No mention of the fact that MD had only seen his son three times prior to that wedding? No mention that a primary reason for MD NOT to call 911 is the fact that he probably drank LOTS more at that wedding than reported? Not mentioned that he was afraid a blood alcohol test might reveal the true nature of his "state of mind?"


I'm just shocked that these things were not stressed more heavily.

Thanks for listening...
 

Karmady

Former Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
5,749
Reaction score
15
I was astounded that two important things were not discussed more heavily in this trial.

1. I was shocked to learn the incredible short period of time between Rhonda walking into the little store and the first shots. It was like a minute and a half or some such time. It would be impossible for all of the back and forth trash talk to have occurred the way MD proposed. Just impossible. Why wasn't that more stressed?

2. Remember when the defense was going on an on about the state of mind of MD prior to the shooting? He was happy...he was thrilled... he just came from the son's wedding where he was welcomed with open arms?????

Really? No mention of the fact that MD had only seen his son three times prior to that wedding? No mention that a primary reason for MD NOT to call 911 is the fact that he probably drank LOTS more at that wedding than reported? Not mentioned that he was afraid a blood alcohol test might reveal the true nature of his "state of mind?"


I'm just shocked that these things were not stressed more heavily.

Thanks for listening...

To your points, the witnesses testified that the trash talk did happen.

Voluntary intoxication can be used to negate the mens rea (state of mind) for specific intent crimes such as Murder 1 in some jurisdictions with the caveat that I haven't researched it in Florida.

~snipped from the link

In some jurisdictions, intoxication may negate specific intent, a particular kind of mens rea applicable only to some crimes. For example, lack of specific intent might reduce murder to manslaughter. Voluntary intoxication nevertheless often will provide basic intent, e.g., the intent required for manslaughter.[8] On the other hand, involuntarily intoxication, for example by punch spiked unforeseeably with alcohol, may give rise to no inference of basic intent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_defenses#Intoxication
 

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,024
Reaction score
1,175
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
I was astounded that two important things were not discussed more heavily in this trial.

1. I was shocked to learn the incredible short period of time between Rhonda walking into the little store and the first shots. It was like a minute and a half or some such time. It would be impossible for all of the back and forth trash talk to have occurred the way MD proposed. Just impossible. Why wasn't that more stressed?

2. Remember when the defense was going on an on about the state of mind of MD prior to the shooting? He was happy...he was thrilled... he just came from the son's wedding where he was welcomed with open arms?????

Really? No mention of the fact that MD had only seen his son three times prior to that wedding? No mention that a primary reason for MD NOT to call 911 is the fact that he probably drank LOTS more at that wedding than reported? Not mentioned that he was afraid a blood alcohol test might reveal the true nature of his "state of mind?"


I'm just shocked that these things were not stressed more heavily.

Thanks for listening...

I watched his testimony after the fact on youtube so could rewind and his detailed and measured account of every single movement and word spoken around the shooting, to me, seemed way too rehearsed and deliberate. In moments like that I don't think people retain that kind of frame by frame detailed memory of every movement they made and sequence of words spoken etc. Unless they are trying to create a story that lines up with a particular defense I mean. It rang very choreographed to me.
 

Bernina

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
11,444
Reaction score
6,064
The crime rate in Scottsdale, AZ is extremely low.

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Scottsdale-Arizona.html

Compare that to Chicago and Los Angeles, which have some of the most restrictive gun laws (remember, even though they're big cities, it's specific crimes per 100K population:
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Chicago-Illinois.html
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Los-Angeles-California.html

But, if you throw in Phoenix........eh......you couldn't pay me to live there, it's lost it's "polite society" image, freeways everywhere, grid lock, gangs, I guess that's what "progress" does, JMO.
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Phoenix-Arizona.html
 

marlap

New Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
1,960
Reaction score
5
I know the jurors didn't want to be interviewed yesterday but I just did a search and didn't see anything about jurors coming forward since then to answer questions.

Has anyone heard anything about any jurors wanting to come forward?
 

ScarlettScarpetta

When the going gets tough, drink coffee
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
12,687
Reaction score
124
I watched his testimony after the fact on youtube so could rewind and his detailed and measured account of every single movement and word spoken around the shooting, to me, seemed way too rehearsed and deliberate. In moments like that I don't think people retain that kind of frame by frame detailed memory of every movement they made and sequence of words spoken etc. Unless they are trying to create a story that lines up with a particular defense I mean. It rang very choreographed to me.

Totally Agree.

He seemed to pull out words and phrases we have heard before in the same kind of trial. A White man, killing a black teen and claiming self defense.

I did not watch any coverage until the last day of the trial. I wanted to see it like the Jury.

I think he thinks he is a great actor. I am glad he is going to prison. But he needs to be found guilty of Murder. IT has to be that Jordan gets his justice.
 

sdmike1974

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
235
Reaction score
253
I'm listening to the commentators and want to scream. They are not even considering that the jury was hung up on m/s 1st or 2nd. They all think they hung in self defense. I hope we find out soon.
I agree that the assumption in much of the media (and on Twitter) seems to be that the jury must have hung on self defense.

I do think many of us consider it unlikely that one or two holdouts for M1 could not have been convinced to side with a majority voting for M2 -- and not put the grieving victim's family through the agony of another trial.

But all you have to do is peruse twitter to find comments like, "I would never ever agree to 2nd degree murder, even if it meant a mistrial."

There are some pretty hardliners out there. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing -- or not understandable given what a detestable human being Michael Dunn has shown himself to be.

I think I speak for many of us when I express the feeling that I hope the reason for the deadlock on the top count leaks to the media in the next few days.
 

Zuri

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
8,782
Reaction score
107
I am so pleased they decided to not make a hasty decision on murder 1. I would much rather see a mistrial. Strolla is worried about the state spending more money lol what a laugh. They tried 5 charges in 1 trial so I would Imagine the state is not worried about getting Justice for Jordan with another trial. Wish a few other trials had a mistrial instead of what happened. That is one thing about Perry I didn't like he was always talking budget. Caylee was worth needing a bigger budget.
I thought it was funny when Strolla went to rub Dunn's arm after the jury was leaving Dunn stepped away from his hand. Now when he talks to Dunn he will see a different creature than before I bet on it.

It was Strolla's fault that he got convicted; his father's fault that he didn't give MD all of his hard earned money so that Dunn could hire a dream team; his son's fault for getting married on November 23rd; Rhonda's fault because she just had to have white wine and chips and would not lie for him; and Charlie's fault for being a puppy who had to be let out of his crate.

Oh and lest I forget, it was the fault of the rapper who made the music; Dodge's fault for having screwy doors and making an SUV; Tommy's aunt's fault for letting Tommy drive the car and have sub woofers in it; Apple's fault for making an IPod and IPhone that allows you to download and play music; the jury's fault for being racist and not understand that MD had more value than JD.

Am I close? Lol. JMV
 

turaj

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
4,277
Reaction score
7,217
I know the jurors didn't want to be interviewed yesterday but I just did a search and didn't see anything about jurors coming forward since then to answer questions.

Has anyone heard anything about any jurors wanting to come forward?

have heard nothing...but not surprised. verdict came in on sat. of a long weekend...most media people are on vacation until Tues. Believe me things are happening behind the scenes...you would think at least one would want to talk ...doubt it will be the one or ones that hung the jury but I would think one of those that felt he should be guilty of m1 would want to explain a bit what happened. Also depends on what kind of agreement they have between each other...I'm sure the one/ones don't want to be exposed. I think as next week moves along you will see something.

Hopefully as interviews come people will post here so we can be sure to catch them...I am very curious.
 

sweets

New Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2009
Messages
105
Reaction score
0
One of the things I think the prosecution could do, to clear up any misconceptions about the child locks, is to bring in an expert on 2002 Dodge Durangos. How the doors work, the auto locks, how far down the rear windows go, would have been helpful. Also the height if the Durango as compared to the Jetta, where the Jetta would have been parked in relation to the Durango with regards to the gunshot trajectory.

IIRC, the Jetta windows were down when MD started shooting. Tevin Thompson stated he reached over and put up Jordan's window prior to the shooting. The shattering of the windows seemed similar, which would give credibility to Tevin's testimony. JMO


Hi Zuri and everyone....mostly a lurker here but read everything and I so agree with you. Please someone who knows how to do this forward this suggestion on to SAO....pls!!!!just in case they did not think about this angle. I think it would resolve a big ? in the jurors mind about this. JMO
sweets
 

marlap

New Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
1,960
Reaction score
5
have heard nothing...but not surprised. verdict came in on sat. of a long weekend...most media people are on vacation until Tues. Believe me things are happening behind the scenes...you would think at least one would want to talk ...doubt it will be the one or ones that hung the jury but I would think one of those that felt he should be guilty of m1 would want to explain a bit what happened. Also depends on what kind of agreement they have between each other...I'm sure the one/ones don't want to be exposed. I think as next week moves along you will see something.

Hopefully as interviews come people will post here so we can be sure to catch them...I am very curious.

Excellent points! Very curious here too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top