He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

On 2/15/2014 10:18 PM, Daring Dufas: Hypocrite Sock Of Killer Loon wrote:
He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years
with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

Killer Loon, how did the court case affect you personally? Are you an
obnoxious DAN who plays loud salaciousness music in public and fear you
may be shot by someone who asks you to turn it down? I know you're a
useful idiot for the elite P.L.L.C.F. who wish to disarm the American
people and you have no clue as to what will happen if those you support
seize power and turn the United States into a dictatorship. I do feel
sorry for you and those of your ilk who have no comprehension of what
will become of America if your puppet handlers get their way. It would
be funny to see you sitting in your sparsely furnished government owned
apartment that's identical to what all citizens are housed in because
everyone is equal and there are no more evil rich people with big lavish
homes. That is, except for the elite you so vociferously support and you
will be an old man sitting there in your drab government issue apartment
munching on government issue Soylent that is supplied to all of the
"Equal" citizens and the one thing going through your addled little
brain over and over again will be "WTF!" Be careful what you wish for
Killer Loon, your wish may come true. ^_^

TDD

Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:
He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.


What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car? TV
said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not hear if
that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses for the guy,
just looking for the facts.

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 6:17:56 AM UTC-6, Ken wrote:
Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.





What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car? TV

said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not hear if

that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses for the guy,

just looking for the facts.

No weapon was ever found.
It was a typical red neck gun hugger lie they use to shoot first, drive away, and ask later.

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 9:13:12 AM UTC-5, Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 6:17:56 AM UTC-6, Ken wrote:

Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:



He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.











What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car? TV



said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not hear if



that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses for the guy,



just looking for the facts.



No weapon was ever found.

It was a typical red neck gun hugger lie they use to shoot first, drive away, and ask later.

And if the shooter had been black and gotten into a similar
confrontation over music, someone wearing the wrong color
jacket, looking at someone the wrong way, etc, that happens about
1000 times more frequently, and that resulted in a shooting death,
what would it be then?

Ken wrote:

Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:
He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.


What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car? TV
said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not hear if
that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses for the guy,
just looking for the facts.

Unclear.

What is clear however is that the police botched the investigation by
not searching the area immediately, leaving it entirely a "reasonable
doubt" as to weather such a shotgun did exist and those in the car
disposed of it in the time they were away from the gas station.

I have plenty of issues with the shooter's actions - not simply fleeing
in his vehicle, firing multiple shots with time between shots and no
apparent continued threat, etc. But there should be different charges
for such actions.

I think everyone's view of the case, including those of the racist
baiters would be different had the police located a shotgun in the car,
and given the police failure that will remain an unknown barring an
admission from one of the surviving parties that were in the car.

As for the initial request to turn down the music, far too much has been
made about what music it was when that is simply not relevant. It is not
racist to ask someone to turn down loud music when they are parked at a
gas station or anywhere stationary where others may be trying to have a
conversation such as a fast food drive through.

Turning music down in such cases is common courtesy, something that all
teens should have learned from their parents. Indeed where I live is a
short distance in from a 65 mph road, and the local kids here are
courteous and turn down their music when they turn of that main road and
I appreciate that courtesy.

On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:30:53 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ken wrote:

Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:
He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.


What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car? TV
said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not hear if
that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses for the guy,
just looking for the facts.

Unclear.

What is clear however is that the police botched the investigation by
not searching the area immediately, leaving it entirely a "reasonable
doubt" as to weather such a shotgun did exist and those in the car
disposed of it in the time they were away from the gas station.

I have plenty of issues with the shooter's actions - not simply fleeing
in his vehicle, firing multiple shots with time between shots and no
apparent continued threat, etc. But there should be different charges
for such actions.

I think everyone's view of the case, including those of the racist
baiters would be different had the police located a shotgun in the car,
and given the police failure that will remain an unknown barring an
admission from one of the surviving parties that were in the car.

As for the initial request to turn down the music, far too much has been
made about what music it was when that is simply not relevant. It is not
racist to ask someone to turn down loud music when they are parked at a
gas station or anywhere stationary where others may be trying to have a
conversation such as a fast food drive through.

Turning music down in such cases is common courtesy, something that all
teens should have learned from their parents. Indeed where I live is a
short distance in from a 65 mph road, and the local kids here are
courteous and turn down their music when they turn of that main road and
I appreciate that courtesy.

You make a good point Pete. After three, four days, SDA Corey
justifies why the police did not investigate or search the distance
traveled from the gas station to another parking lot AND then return
to the gas station to call 911 by the victims in the vehicle. Only
then they knew one guy was shot? Amazing.

Of course they are not likely to find a shotgun after that time lapse
if one did exist and was tossed from the vehicle.

She justifies it, but in normal investigations, the police should do
so immediately.

"...Attorneys for Dunn argued that the weapon Dunn said he saw could
have been disposed of by the friends while in the adjacent parking
lot. Police did not search the plaza parking lot that night.
Prosecutors said police didn’t know to search it because Dunn fled the
scene and didn’t tell his story to police until the next day when he
was arrested."

"The plaza was searched four days after the crime. Corey said the
Sheriff’s Office handled the case well, and she didn’t believe any
mistakes were made."

http://members.jacksonville.com/news/crime/2014-02-15/story/dunn-guilty-attempted-murder-hung-jury-murder-jordan-davis

They had witnesses to the shooting. Yet would not search the distance
traveled to another parking lot until the shooter prances back into
town and declares he shot the kid when he learned he died?

What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car?
TV said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not
hear if that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses
for the guy, just looking for the facts.

Unclear.

What is clear however is that the police botched the investigation by
not searching the area immediately, leaving it entirely a "reasonable
doubt" as to weather such a shotgun did exist and those in the car
disposed of it in the time they were away from the gas station.

As to the shotgun -- testimony from his girlfriend revealed that
he Dunn never mentioned another weapon being involved.

He drove off to his motel, ordered a pizza, and slept off the numerous
drinks he had earlier that evening at a wedding reception.

83LowRider wrote:

What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car?
TV said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not
hear if that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses
for the guy, just looking for the facts.

Unclear.

What is clear however is that the police botched the investigation by
not searching the area immediately, leaving it entirely a "reasonable
doubt" as to weather such a shotgun did exist and those in the car
disposed of it in the time they were away from the gas station.

As to the shotgun -- testimony from his girlfriend revealed that
he Dunn never mentioned another weapon being involved.

He drove off to his motel, ordered a pizza, and slept off the numerous
drinks he had earlier that evening at a wedding reception.

How talkative are you when you've just had a traumatic experience and
are also still a bit drunk?

Pete C. wrote:

As to the shotgun -- testimony from his girlfriend revealed that
he Dunn never mentioned another weapon being involved.

He drove off to his motel, ordered a pizza, and slept off the
numerous drinks he had earlier that evening at a wedding reception.

How talkative are you when you've just had a traumatic experience and
are also still a bit drunk?

Had I just fired numerous shots into a car and got back into mine...
1) there is no way my wife wouldn't be asking me a million questions.
2) if there was only ONE question asked, it would be 'why did
you shoot at them?'.
3) the adrenaline after such an occurence would have one so pumped
up that remaining silent wouldn't even be an option.
4) he wasn't so drunk that he didn't leave a good shot pattern
on the other car... and certainly not so drunk that he didn't
make it back to the hotel and remain awake/alert enough to
order and eat a pizza. sidenote - having just now looked
back at her testimony, she says he had 3 or 4 drinks over the
course of the evening

On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:55:42 -0500, wrote:

The only thing I disagree with is he really could not have driven off
and left his girlfriend in what he saw as a threatening situation.

The first shot may have been plausible as self defense but shooting at
a fleeing vehicle is aggravated assault with a firearm at a minimum.
The sentence is the same, 25 to life.

You only have the right to defend yourself until the threat is abated.
Then you have to stop shooting.

One shot, one kill is easy to defend as self defense. The second,
third or ninth shot is questionable as relating to pre-mediation. Not
as easy to defend.

If you must, make the first shot count.

On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite
TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

I don't object to the thread but you should have prreceded it with OT.

There are two kinds of OT here. This kind that is defitinitely OT and
should be marked.

And those involving strange mechanical things, houses built upside down,
bicycles 8 feet high. Those are off topic too in that no one is trying
to repair anything and the poster usually has nothing to do with the
topic, which he just saw online But almost everyone who does home
repair is interested in those threads, so maybe -- it's up to you all -
they don't need to be marked OT.

But this one should have been.

On 2/16/2014 1:47 PM, micky wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite
TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years
with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

I don't object to the thread but you should have prreceded it with
OT.

There are two kinds of OT here. This kind that is defitinitely OT
and should be marked.

And those involving strange mechanical things, houses built upside
down, bicycles 8 feet high. Those are off topic too in that no one
is trying to repair anything and the poster usually has nothing to do
with the topic, which he just saw online But almost everyone who
does home repair is interested in those threads, so maybe -- it's up
to you all - they don't need to be marked OT.

But this one should have been.

Micky, you're a nice guy but you're trying to reason with Killer Loon
who's a poster child for the P.L.L.C.F. Trying to reason with those of
its ilk is like zipping up your pants with your wiener hanging out. ^_^

TDD

On 2/16/2014 8:13 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
Micky, you're a nice guy but you're trying to reason with Killer Loon
who's a poster child for the P.L.L.C.F. Trying to reason with those of
its ilk is like zipping up your pants with your wiener hanging out. ^_^

TDD

Cuts down on your moyel bill.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 2/16/2014 7:57 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 2/16/2014 8:13 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
Micky, you're a nice guy but you're trying to reason with Killer
Loon who's a poster child for the P.L.L.C.F. Trying to reason with
those of its ilk is like zipping up your pants with your wiener
hanging out. ^_^

TDD

Cuts down on your moyel bill.

That sort of activity is very immohel. o_O

TDD

wrote in message ...
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite
TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a
jury?
This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

Should have been charged with voluntary manslaughter.

On 2/16/2014 12:45 AM, Guv Bob wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite
TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+
years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a
jury? This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

Should have been charged with voluntary manslaughter.

There is always an appeal which may not be affected by the political
hysteria the race baiters have stirred up. A Negro man was acquitted of
murdering a Caucasian teenager who he shot because he felt threatened.\
It happened in New Your and no one gave a frak. So I think the hapless
fellow has grounds for an appeal. It was a trial by jury and there is
always someone who doesn't like a jury's decision. o_O

TDD

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 2:31:35 AM UTC-6, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 2/16/2014 12:45 AM, Guv Bob wrote:

wrote in message

...

On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite

TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:



He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+

years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.



Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a

jury? This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".



Should have been charged with voluntary manslaughter.



There is always an appeal which may not be affected by the political

hysteria the race baiters have stirred up. A Negro man was acquitted of

murdering a Caucasian teenager who he shot because he felt threatened.\

It happened in New Your and no one gave a frak. So I think the hapless

fellow has grounds for an appeal. It was a trial by jury and there is

always someone who doesn't like a jury's decision. o_O



TDD

Appeals cost money .. how does one do they while serving 40 year sentence.

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:43:11 AM UTC-5, Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 2:31:35 AM UTC-6, The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 2/16/2014 12:45 AM, Guv Bob wrote:



wrote in message



...



On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite



TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:







He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+



years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.







Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a



jury? This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".







Should have been charged with voluntary manslaughter.







There is always an appeal which may not be affected by the political



hysteria the race baiters have stirred up. A Negro man was acquitted of



murdering a Caucasian teenager who he shot because he felt threatened.\



It happened in New Your and no one gave a frak. So I think the hapless



fellow has grounds for an appeal. It was a trial by jury and there is



always someone who doesn't like a jury's decision. o_O







TDD



Appeals cost money .. how does one do they while serving 40 year sentence.

It's called using a public defender

On 2/16/2014 9:43 AM, Daring Dufas: Hypocrite Sock Of Killer Loon wrote:
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 2:31:35 AM UTC-6, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 2/16/2014 12:45 AM, Guv Bob wrote:

wrote in message

...

On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas:
Hypocrite Sock of Killer Loon" wrote:
He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+
years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.


Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always
hang a jury? This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

Should have been charged with voluntary manslaughter.

There is always an appeal which may not be affected by the
political hysteria the race baiters have stirred up. A Negro man
was acquitted of murdering a Caucasian teenager who he shot because
he felt threatened.\ It happened in New Your and no one gave a
frak. So I think the hapless fellow has grounds for an appeal. It
was a trial by jury and there is always someone who doesn't like a
jury's decision. o_O

TDD

Appeals cost money .. how does one do they while serving 40 year
sentence.

Oh Killer Loon, first of all, you should really get a proper news client
and I'm sure you and those of your ilk want to do whatever you can to
impoverish the fellow so he can't afford competent legal council. To bad
for you P.L.L.C.F. that a large group of patriots may get behind the
fellow to help him. ^_^

TDD

On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 22:45:03 -0800, "Guv Bob"
wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite
TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a
jury?
This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

Should have been charged with voluntary manslaughter.

First degree murder, premeditated murder does not require that one sit
in his room making plans weeks or days or hours in advance. it doesn't
require that someone make a special purchase of a weapon or that he plan
to meet someone somewhere. The intention and the premeditation
necessary for first degree murder can be formed one second before the
act is committed. That's the law in every state, afaik, and certainly
in most. And I'm pretty sure there are cases where most people
would agree with this rule.

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:25:44 -0500, micky
wrote:

First degree murder, premeditated murder does not require that one sit
in his room making plans weeks or days or hours in advance. it doesn't
require that someone make a special purchase of a weapon or that he plan
to meet someone somewhere. The intention and the premeditation
necessary for first degree murder can be formed one second before the
act is committed.

I'm not sure premeditation can be formed in "one second".

Consider crimes of passion. Often acts that are instantaneous.

The Burning Bed Defense?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Burning_Bed

" Hughes went to court in Lansing, Michigan, and found by a jury of
her peers to be not guilty by reason of temporary insanity."

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 4:43:35 PM UTC-6, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:25:44 -0500, micky

wrote:



First degree murder, premeditated murder does not require that one sit

in his room making plans weeks or days or hours in advance. it doesn't

require that someone make a special purchase of a weapon or that he plan

to meet someone somewhere. The intention and the premeditation

necessary for first degree murder can be formed one second before the

act is committed.



I'm not sure premeditation can be formed in "one second".



Consider crimes of passion. Often acts that are instantaneous.



The Burning Bed Defense?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Burning_Bed



" Hughes went to court in Lansing, Michigan, and found by a jury of

her peers to be not guilty by reason of temporary insanity."


So why don't you impress us with your extensive law background and prosecution experience and explain why 1st degree is not valid.

Cite all the criminal cases you personally prosecuted.

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:43:35 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:25:44 -0500, micky
wrote:

First degree murder, premeditated murder does not require that one sit
in his room making plans weeks or days or hours in advance. it doesn't
require that someone make a special purchase of a weapon or that he plan
to meet someone somewhere. The intention and the premeditation
necessary for first degree murder can be formed one second before the
act is committed.

I'm not sure premeditation can be formed in "one second".

Without debating that one, how about 3 seconds. No more than that is
needed in many states.

One example someone gave on the radio today, from one state, was the
time between the first time one pulled the trigger and the second time,
and that means consecutive shots, without a pause in between.

Consider crimes of passion. Often acts that are instantaneous.

Occasions where premeditation is not found for one reason or anotehr
don't change the minimum time necessary when those reasons are not
present.

The Burning Bed Defense?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Burning_Bed

" Hughes went to court in Lansing, Michigan, and found by a jury of
her peers to be not guilty by reason of temporary insanity."

"micky" wrote in message ...
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:43:35 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:25:44 -0500, micky
wrote:

First degree murder, premeditated murder does not require that one sit
in his room making plans weeks or days or hours in advance. it doesn't
require that someone make a special purchase of a weapon or that he plan
to meet someone somewhere. The intention and the premeditation
necessary for first degree murder can be formed one second before the
act is committed.

I'm not sure premeditation can be formed in "one second".

Without debating that one, how about 3 seconds. No more than that is
needed in many states.

One example someone gave on the radio today, from one state, was the
time between the first time one pulled the trigger and the second time,
and that means consecutive shots, without a pause in between.

Consider crimes of passion. Often acts that are instantaneous.

Occasions where premeditation is not found for one reason or anotehr
don't change the minimum time necessary when those reasons are not
present.

The Burning Bed Defense?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Burning_Bed

" Hughes went to court in Lansing, Michigan, and found by a jury of
her peers to be not guilty by reason of temporary insanity."

Maybe so in theory. I think the jury would have gone for voluntary manslaughter. When you get into FDM, every technicality gives the defense a way to derail the verdict. Got to convince 12 people.

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years
with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a
jury?
This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

If the sentence is set to run concurrently then he
would be given 20 years... out in 13.

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 3:22:02 AM UTC-6, 83LowRider wrote:
He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years

with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.



Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a

jury?

This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".



If the sentence is set to run concurrently then he

would be given 20 years... out in 13.

The judge will throw the book at him because of the lies told. He never manned up an accepted any responsibilty. He drove home and ordered pizza.

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:42:26 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 04:22:02 -0500, "83LowRider"

wrote:



Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a

jury?

This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".



If the sentence is set to run concurrently then he

would be given 20 years... out in 13.





Not in Florida. The gun charge itself is 25 to life and our law says

you have to serve 85%. minimum

This is the most detailed analysis I've seen of the actual convictions and possible sentences:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02...-most-charges/

"Detailed Charges on Which Dunn Found Guilty

Among the charges of which he has been found guilty a

Three counts of attempted murder in the second degree (FL §782.051) for shooting at Kevin Thompson, Leland Brunson, and Tommy Storns, the three friends with Jordan Davis in Storns' SUV

Throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle (FL §790.19) for firing into the SUV in which the boys were riding.

Finally, because these felonies were committed with the use of a firearm, Dunn is also subject to Florida's "10-20-Life" mandatory minimum sentencing law (FL §775.087), made infamous by the case of Marissa Alexander.

Under the mandatory minimum sentencing scheme, Dunn faces mandatory minimum sentences of 20 years on each of the three counts of attempted murder and 15 years on the charge of throwing of missiles (because a gun was used Florida's "10-20-Life" statute bumps what would normally be a 2nd degree felony to a 1st degree felony)

Because all the charges stem from a single set of acts, the sentences would likely be served concurrently, rather than consecutively, meaning in effect that Dunn would be sentenced to 20 years, the Florida norm. The sentencing judge has the discretion, however, to make the sentences consecutive, in which case Dunn would be looking at 75 years-effectively a life sentence for a ~40 year old. His sentencing may take place immediately, or at a separate sentencing hearing."

Applying your 85% rule, still seems from the above that it's possible
he could be out in 17 years, if he gets lucky.

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 08:05:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:42:26 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 04:22:02 -0500, "83LowRider"

wrote:



Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a

jury?

This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".



If the sentence is set to run concurrently then he

would be given 20 years... out in 13.





Not in Florida. The gun charge itself is 25 to life and our law says

you have to serve 85%. minimum

This is the most detailed analysis I've seen of the actual convictions and possible sentences:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02...-most-charges/

"Detailed Charges on Which Dunn Found Guilty

Among the charges of which he has been found guilty a

Three counts of attempted murder in the second degree (FL §782.051) for shooting at Kevin Thompson, Leland Brunson, and Tommy Storns, the three friends with Jordan Davis in Storns' SUV

Throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle (FL §790.19) for firing into the SUV in which the boys were riding.

Finally, because these felonies were committed with the use of a firearm, Dunn is also subject to Florida's "10-20-Life" mandatory minimum sentencing law (FL §775.087), made infamous by the case of Marissa Alexander.

Under the mandatory minimum sentencing scheme, Dunn faces mandatory minimum sentences of 20 years on each of the three counts of attempted murder and 15 years on the charge of throwing of missiles (because a gun was used Florida's "10-20-Life" statute bumps what would normally be a 2nd degree felony to a 1st degree felony)

Because all the charges stem from a single set of acts, the sentences would likely be served concurrently, rather than consecutively, meaning in effect that Dunn would be sentenced to 20 years, the Florida norm. The sentencing judge has the discretion, however, to make the sentences consecutive, in which case Dunn would be looking at 75 years-effectively a life sentence for a ~40 year old. His sentencing may take place immediately, or at a separate sentencing hearing."

Applying your 85% rule, still seems from the above that it's possible
he could be out in 17 years, if he gets lucky.

I doubt he will be out in 17 years. The gun charges would be served
consecutively to the murder charges.

10-20-Life Provisions

"The law specifies exactly what categories of crimes fall under it, it
mandates that offenders be sentenced to the law's maximum allowable
extent for the committed felony, and that the mandatory sentences must
be completed consecutively to any additional sentence an offender must
serve.

The law's name comes from three main mandatory sentences: 1) producing
a firearm during the commission of certain felonies mandates at least
a 10-year prison sentence; 2) firing one mandates at least a 20-year
prison sentence; and 3) shooting someone mandates a minimum sentence
of 25 years to life regardless of whether a victim is killed or simply
injured. The maximum penalty is a life sentence unless the defendant
is charged with felony murder or first degree murder in which case the
maximum is the death penalty

References [2][6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-20-Life#Provisions

See the conditions of waiver.

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 08:05:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:


=20
If the sentence is set to run concurrently then he
=20
would be given 20 years... out in 13.=20
=20

=20
=20
=20
Not in Florida. The gun charge itself is 25 to life and our law says
=20
you have to serve 85%. minimum

This is the most detailed analysis I've seen of the actual convictions and =
possible sentences:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02...-dunn-guilty-=
of-most-charges/

"Detailed Charges on Which Dunn Found Guilty
=20
Among the charges of which he has been found guilty a
=20
Three counts of attempted murder in the second degree (FL =A7782.051) for s=
hooting at Kevin Thompson, Leland Brunson, and Tommy Storns, the three frie=
nds with Jordan Davis in Storns' SUV

The other boy in the front seat did turn down the radio when the guy
complained, according to him, but the driver turned it up again.

Was it the driver who was killed? I thought so.

But then, assuming the picture wasnt reversed, it looks like the shooter
was standing on the right side of the car shooting through the right
door. He shot 10 times!!! Hit the car 9 times!!.

Woudn't one normally attribute the car radio to the driver? OTOH, the
shooter said someone insulted him. If so, do you know who that was
supposed to be?

Per micky:
The other boy in the front seat did turn down the radio when the guy
complained, according to him, but the driver turned it up again.

Was it the driver who was killed? I thought so.

But then, assuming the picture wasnt reversed, it looks like the shooter
was standing on the right side of the car shooting through the right
door. He shot 10 times!!! Hit the car 9 times!!.

Woudn't one normally attribute the car radio to the driver? OTOH, the
shooter said someone insulted him. If so, do you know who that was
supposed to be?

If it was one of those mobile boom boxes where peoples walls and windows
shake when the car drives by, I wonder that the perpetrator didn't plead
temporary insanity.
--
Pete Cresswell

On 2/16/2014 1:37 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per micky:
The other boy in the front seat did turn down the radio when the
guy complained, according to him, but the driver turned it up
again.

Was it the driver who was killed? I thought so.

But then, assuming the picture wasnt reversed, it looks like the
shooter was standing on the right side of the car shooting through
the right door. He shot 10 times!!! Hit the car 9 times!!.

Woudn't one normally attribute the car radio to the driver? OTOH,
the shooter said someone insulted him. If so, do you know who that
was supposed to be?

If it was one of those mobile boom boxes where peoples walls and
windows shake when the car drives by, I wonder that the perpetrator
didn't plead temporary insanity.

I would have pleaded self defense because hearing damage is permanent.
I would claim I was stopping an assault on me. ^_^

TDD

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message

stuff snipped

If it was one of those mobile boom boxes where peoples walls and windows
shake when the car drives by, I wonder that the perpetrator didn't plead
temporary insanity.

That's actually a pretty brilliant defense strategy. If I were his lawyer,
I'd subpoena the ATF agents from the Koresh incident or someone qualified to
testify about the use extremely loud music to deliberately disorient people.
There have been studies that show that extremely loud music can disrupt
cardiac and breathing rhythms.

Who hasn't been near a window shaking audio system at one time or another?
Just the other day at a stoplight with all the windows closed up rolls this
boombox on wheels with the weird all-bass road-shaking thumping that I
assume was some kind of music. I don't think I've ever heard someone
blasting a song I actually like. (-: Our custodial engineer had a woofer
in his car the size of a full-size tire mounted in the hatch area. You
could hear him approaching from a block away.

I once lived next door to a disco club. I can still hear "Stayin' Alive"
and "Hot Stuff" ringing in my ears on a bad night. They played those two
songs in their full plaster-loosening glory at least twice a night and the
pictures rattled on the walls. Sometimes they would play the super-extended
"disco" mixes with the same bass lines thumping away for what seemed liked
hours. If I end up in hell, those songs will be waiting for me. But the
rent was cheap. (-:

You've uncovered what could easily be a successful line of defense in any
retrial. Beats the hell out of that contrived "shotgun in the rear window
so I shot the front seat passenger" defense. I wonder if the judge would
have allowed a demonstration of exactly what song was playing and how
loudly. Drums, fightsongs and bugles have been used to whip soldiers into a
patriotic fighting frenzy.

The more I think about it, the more I think you might have hit on what
really happened. Dunn did flip out. Does anyone know what song was
playing? If I represented him (which I can't because I'm not a lawyer) I
would find an expert witness/shrink who would test Dunn using an fMRI while
subjecting him to the same music v. music he liked. If people have favorite
songs, and most of us do, then there must exist the exact opposite. Songs
we just can't stand.

Marvin Gaye's father hated "Sexual Healing" so much that he killed him after
listening to it.

http://voices.yahoo.com/sexual-heali...003.html?cat=9

There's actual a lot of precedent out there. I am sure you couldn't find a
juror hasn't been driven to near madness by someone with a loud stereo at
one time in their lives. Zulu warriors drove their adversaries to the edge
by the sounds the made clacking their spears on their shields.

BTW, for anyone wondering about the sentencing, here's another county heard
from:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5...urder.html.csp

Dunn showed no emotion as the verdicts were read. Each attempted
second-degree murder charge carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in
prison, while the fourth charge he was convicted on carries a maximum of 15.
A sentencing date will be set later.

Who would be on trial if those kids *did* have guns and fired back? If
someone comes at you because he thinks you have a gun and you actually do
who's standing whose ground?

--
Bobby G.

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:32:16 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 08:05:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:


=20
If the sentence is set to run concurrently then he
=20
would be given 20 years... out in 13.=20
=20

=20
=20
=20
Not in Florida. The gun charge itself is 25 to life and our law says
=20
you have to serve 85%. minimum

This is the most detailed analysis I've seen of the actual convictions and =
possible sentences:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02...-dunn-guilty-=
of-most-charges/

"Detailed Charges on Which Dunn Found Guilty
=20
Among the charges of which he has been found guilty a
=20
Three counts of attempted murder in the second degree (FL =A7782.051) for s=
hooting at Kevin Thompson, Leland Brunson, and Tommy Storns, the three frie=
nds with Jordan Davis in Storns' SUV

The other boy in the front seat did turn down the radio when the guy
complained, according to him,

Now that I read here that the boy in the passenger seat was the one who
was killed, I guess it was someone else who said he turned the radio
down. Maybe it was the driver. The video of him saying that was taken
over his left shoulder, and it looked like he was sitting in the
passenger seat, but I suppose they all would be out of the car before
someone showed up to inteveriew them.

but the driver turned it up again.

Maybe it was the one on the right he was referring to, who turned it up
again.

What do this case, Trayvon Martin, the shooting of the movie texter have
in common. All by someone carrying a gun. At least two of them for
no special reason.

During this same period there was another teenager accosted and he was
hit over the head with a cell phone. If there was a bruise, it was gone
in a couple days. Partly because his accoster was carrying only a cell
phone, not a gun.

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:43:20 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:32:16 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 08:05:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:


=20
If the sentence is set to run concurrently then he
=20
would be given 20 years... out in 13.=20
=20

=20
=20
=20
Not in Florida. The gun charge itself is 25 to life and our law says
=20
you have to serve 85%. minimum

This is the most detailed analysis I've seen of the actual convictions and =
possible sentences:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02...-dunn-guilty-=
of-most-charges/

"Detailed Charges on Which Dunn Found Guilty
=20
Among the charges of which he has been found guilty a
=20
Three counts of attempted murder in the second degree (FL =A7782.051) for s=
hooting at Kevin Thompson, Leland Brunson, and Tommy Storns, the three frie=
nds with Jordan Davis in Storns' SUV

The other boy in the front seat did turn down the radio when the guy
complained, according to him,

Now that I read here that the boy in the passenger seat was the one who
was killed, I guess it was someone else who said he turned the radio
down. Maybe it was the driver.

If it was a portable radio, not the car radio, it coudl have been
someone in the back seat who turned it down, and the other guy in the
back seat who turned it bck up.

The video of him saying that was taken
over his left shoulder, and it looked like he was sitting in the
passenger seat, but I suppose they all would be out of the car before
someone showed up to inteveriew them.

but the driver turned it up again.

But "someone else turned it up again", he said. I had assumed that was
the driver, but I should have said it was the driver.

AIUI, it appears the shooter had just driven into the parking place.
If he didn't like the noise, he could have backed out that spot and
parked somewhere else. Later, when they got into a yelling match,
and, he says, he thought he saw a shotgun, it would have probably taken
less time to start the car and back up than it took to lean over to the
glove box, get the gun, chamber a bullet and shoot. Plus, unless he
killed the guy with the alleged shotgun on the first shot, shooting at
him would be almost certain to get him to shoot back at you. But just
backing up is much less likely to cause him to shoot and in a few
seconds, the driver would be too far back to get hit without the alleged
shotgun guy getting out of the car or shooting through his own rear
window.

One reporter from NBC suggested that the hung jury on murder occcurred
because at least one jurror believed that the shooter might have thought
there was a shotgun, but the three convictions for murder were based on
his shooting at the SUV as it was driving away. He plainly wasn't in
any danger then but he was still shooting!! So even the negatvie jury
votes on murder would agree on attempted murder for the other 3.
Maybe the NBC guy is right.





Maybe it was the one on the right he was referring to, who turned it up
again.

What do this case, Trayvon Martin, the shooting of the movie texter have
in common. All by someone carrying a gun. At least two of them
carrying the gun for no special reason.

During this same period there was another teenager accosted and he was
hit over the head with a cell phone. If there was a bruise, it was gone
in a couple days. Partly because his accoster was carrying only a cell
phone, not a gun.

On Saturday, February 15, 2014 10:31:48 PM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite

TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:



He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.



Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a

jury?

This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

Justice is a hard subject for many to comprehend. Maybe he will roll over a flea bargain.

On Saturday, February 15, 2014 11:31:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite

TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:



He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.



Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a

jury?

This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

I would agree that they should at least wait to see the
actual sentence handed down. But he's most likely not going
to get 60 years. The minimum is 20 years on each count and
the judge could probably have them served concurrently. So,
he might just be facing 20 years. Then you typically have
time off for good behavior, parole, etc. He might be out
in 15 if he's lucky.

I didn't follow this much, but from what I see, the defendant
appeared quick to open fire and to continue to fire, when
there appeared to have been other options. That's why it was
easy for the jury to convict him on the attempted murder
charge for continuing to fire as they drove away.
One part in his story that makes
no sense to me is that he claims that while they were all
still in their cars, as the confrontation escalated, he
thought he saw a guy in the back point a shotgun out the car.
So, he says he reached over to the glove compartment,
got his gun and when the passenger started to get out he
started firing. But he started shooting
at the guy in the passenger seat, and that's the guy he killed.
THAT makes no sense, does it? If you think the guy in the
back seat has a shotgun, why in the world would you open fire
on the guy in the passenger seat? If his buddy has a shotgun,
he's in a perfect spot to blow you away.

Also his behavior afterward, ie fleeing rather than sticking around
suggests it wasn't a case of justified self defense. But in cases like
this, unless you hear all the testimony that the jury did,
see all the evidence, it's hard to sort the whole thing out. It
is another sad case of how bad behavior on both sides can
turn into something really bad happening. There appears to be
no dispute that the black kids in the car were playing obnoxiously
loud music and they started the verbal assault when he politely
asked them to turn it down. That's one of the risks you run
when you want to behave like that, you may run into someone
equally willing to escalate and then really bad things can happen.

On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 23:31:48 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:18:15 -0800 (PST), "Daring Dufas: Hypocrite
TeaBillie on welfare" wrote:

He will be retried for murder due to hung jury and faces 60+ years with current convictions. Not ideal but it's not over.

The news always adds up the maximum sentences and presents it in this
way, even though almost no one ever gets the sum of all the sentences.

They do this for everyone, but I'm afraid that those who haven't noticed
this feel wronged when the criminal who hurt them or killed somone they
cared about gets so much less than what the news suggested they would
get. They feel wronged by the criminal and betrayed by the courts.

Another example where the news should be ashamed of itself, and this
time, I'm not sure but I I may need to include radio and newspapers. I
don't recall if they participate in this or not.

Why would they ever retry him on a charge that will always hang a
jury?
This guy is 46 and the 60 years is easily "life".

No. Especially if someone is a first offender, or even the first time
it's a felony, the judge will have some, maybe all sentences served
concurrently, and won't give him the maximum for the most serious
conviction.

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 19:04:50 -0500, wrote:

No. Especially if someone is a first offender, or even the first time
it's a felony, the judge will have some, maybe all sentences served
concurrently, and won't give him the maximum for the most serious
conviction.

This is Florida. The prosecutor can push a 10-20 life on this guy and
since he shot someone it is automatic 25 to life.
Remember the woman doing 20 for a warning shot. Same prosecutor.
This guy will have his sentence commuted when he is so old and sick
the state doesn't want to pay to watch him die.

We had an old guy from the French Connection. He was doing 85 years.
One day he up and died.

Caption: "The sumbeach cheated the government. He should be buried
standing up until his time is served, then we can lay him to rest."

USP Lewisburgh, PA

On 2/16/2014 6:37 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 19:04:50 -0500, wrote:

No. Especially if someone is a first offender, or even the
first time it's a felony, the judge will have some, maybe all
sentences served concurrently, and won't give him the maximum for
the most serious conviction.

This is Florida. The prosecutor can push a 10-20 life on this guy
and since he shot someone it is automatic 25 to life. Remember the
woman doing 20 for a warning shot. Same prosecutor. This guy will
have his sentence commuted when he is so old and sick the state
doesn't want to pay to watch him die.

We had an old guy from the French Connection. He was doing 85
years. One day he up and died.

Caption: "The sumbeach cheated the government. He should be buried
standing up until his time is served, then we can lay him to rest."

USP Lewisburgh, PA

Only if he was a standup guy but if he bragged that he could do his time
standing on his head, he should have been buried that way. ^_^

TDD