Of course there is evidence, Dunn is a good 'ole white boy according to SA and S07.
He claims self defense, but there isn't a single bit of evidence that supports his claim. That is, if you're willing to examine the actual facts of the case.
Of course there is evidence, Dunn is a good 'ole white boy according to SA and S07.
False. I routinely stand up for all races, but I know that agenda makes you feel all fuzzy inside.
When you run with current felons on probation in your crew you will never get the benefit of doubt from me or anyone else who thinks logically rather than with emotion when the evidence perfectly matches the victim's story.
They left the scene, supposedly didn't know someone was shot and bleeding out, then circled a parking lot before returning to the scene. And last I read, they didn't tell police that they left because they had someone on the way to pick up that shotgun.
Unless more evidence comes out Dunn is absolutely not guilty of any crime.
I'd rather have my stereo stolen than a person I've never even met shot and killed, but hay that's just me. And I also know I'd rather have my stereo stolen than a psycho shoot me because he doesn't like my music. But again, hay, that's just me...
Do you really expect adult men with responsibilities to be duking it out with these thugs?
I have a family to support. If someone gets physical with me then my life (and family) is in danger and I will react accordingly.
Kids the real world is not like high school. There isn't a someone around the corner who will break up a fight.
This entire notion that you 'should' have a boxing match with a violent thug is ridiculous. Some of you need to visit worldstarhiphop and see how much respect these thugs give in their knockout videos.
That's because you are a liberal coward and refuse to stand up for anything important. No. not me...let someone else protect my freedoms. Typical Obama supporter. Cowards the lot of yas. Fact is, Dunn is still alive. So far.
Of the two people involved in this, who had the most to lose? Based on that, which one should have done something different that sad day?
Unless it was YOUR stolen property Einstein. Like it or not, no one has the right to take anyone else's stuff. If ya do ya pay the consequences. No sympathy here. Pity the foo' that gets caught taking my stuff. And you would be the same way. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't make it any less serious.
Dunn would still be alive even if he didn't shoot Jordan Davis, because the gun that Jordan Davis "presented" was imaginary. Now Dunn has no money to pay for his own defense and will likely spend years in prison.
Both Dunn and Davis made mistakes that day. Jordan Davis made the mistake of yelling at Dunn. Dunn made the mistake of needlessly ending the life of Jordan Davis because Jordan Davis yelled at him.
What amazes me is that to people like you, Jordan Davis's mistake was inexcusable and Dunn's was excusable. I don't get that.
You can say Dunn thought he saw a gun, but if you keep saying Davis actually had a weapon you're lying. They didn't drive around the block and dump the gun, they drove to an adjacent parking lot a few hundred feet away. Witnesses were watching them. They didn't have an opportunity to get rid of the imaginary gun. No gun was found. It's pretty clear that there was no gun.
I guess if the facts don't support your position, lying is your only option.
Never said Dunn was inexcusable. Both did make mistakes yes. My point was and is for the clowns here that think Dunn was the only one that was wrong. Either party could have done something different to change the outcome. Neither party backed down.
So we go back to the beginning to see what started the whole mess to see if this tragedy could have been avoided. Fact is, Dunn never started anything. Not saying he shouldn't pay for what he did. However, the loud hip hop music was what set the series of events in motion. The loud music was the trigger. A simple considerate volume control being set and everybody goes home happy. No dying, no jailtime.
If nothing else comes of this, maybe just maybe some people will stop going out their way to piss other people off.
That is the moral of this story because the laws don't stop anyone from doing anything. Laws don't come into play until after the damage is done. When people are heated the absolute last thing they think about is the legality of their actions. They just act.
You have some factually incorrect info here. They drove from the gas station to a nearby strip mall. No single witness watched them the entire time. There are witnesses that saw them at the gas station. Some saw them leave. Some at the strip mall saw them arrive there and then leave back to the gas station.
No single witness watched them the entire time from their departure from the gas station. Their arrival at the strip mall, and then their round trip back to the gas station.
If there had been a witness with eyes on the durango the entire time I would be highly inclined to agree that there was no evidence of a shotgun or an object that looked like a firearm.
Right now I am still on the fence in my decision for this case. There just isn't enough evidence for either direction that I know of. There is evidence that points to self defense, and evidence that points to murder. I've stated which of the evidence I've seen which points to those respective verdicts.
What's with all the white guilt in here? Jewish media propaganda at work in this topic. Speak out against a black thug = RACIST REDNECK!!!!1 Reminds me of this: http://imgur.com/KCOAuIR
If you're not banned for this, this place has gone to shit.
I didn't say a single witness watched them the entire time, so no I didn't say anything that was factually incorrect. My understanding is that witnesses saw them get out of the vehicle at the strip mall but didn't see them dispose of a gun there. If they didn't do it there, where did they do it?
Do you think it's plausible that the kids had a gun and dumped it somewhere within a few hundred feet of the scene of the crime when they could have just as easily kept driving and dumped it somewhere on the way to a hospital?
That's not plausible at all. I don't think you're on the fence, I think you really, really want to believe Dunn. All he had to do was say these kids had a gun and you've abandoned all logic to believe him.
He may have thought that he saw a gun, but he didn't.
A single witnesses saw them drive up to the parking lot of the stripmall, but didn't watch them the entire time. Nor was he able to watch the actions of all of them at once. The witness from the strip mall never saw them dump anything, which is not to say they did not do it when he wasn't watching.
Nor to say they didn't toss it while driving to the parking lot into a ditch out their vehicle's window. At which point there was no witnesses to their actions.
I'm not saying that is what happened at all. Only that there still exists the probability there was a weapon or a weapon like object that was dumped. How probable? I can't speculate. But there is not enough evidence to completely dismiss it either.
You're not thinking logically. If they were afraid of being caught with the imaginary shotgun, why would they throw it out the window onto the street within a few hundred feet of the scene of the crime? Why would they throw it out in a parking lot a few hundred feet from the scene of the crime? Why wouldn't they just keep driving and throw it out where it wouldn't be easily found?
With the evidence we have right now, it's just not plausible that they had a gun.
Why? Easy... they toss it in a ditch or open dumpster that initially conceals the firearm from sight. One of them is a felon on probation and a firearm alone would land them in hot water. So getting rid of it would be top priority if they had one. Period. I have no idea at this moment a potential spot they could toss a weapon at which could initially conceal it from prying eyes until friends could come grab it.
Toss it somewhere out of sight FAST in an area they know there is no witnesses or they can block the view of witnesses. Leave it there while calling for friends to get their asses over to the drop location pronto to pick up the weapon.
It makes perfect sense logically speaking. Until it can be ruled out that there was no such way the kids in the durango could have dumped a weapon without it being seen by someone then it still remains a probability that they had one.
Why? Easy... they toss it in a ditch or open dumpster that initially conceals the firearm from sight. One of them is a felon on probation and a firearm alone would land them in hot water. So getting rid of it would be top priority if they had one. Period. I have no idea at this moment a potential spot they could toss a weapon at which could initially conceal it from prying eyes until friends could come grab it.
Toss it somewhere out of sight FAST in an area they know there is no witnesses or they can block the view of witnesses. Leave it there while calling for friends to get their asses over to the drop location pronto to pick up the weapon.
It makes perfect sense logically speaking. Until it can be ruled out that there was no such way the kids in the durango could have dumped a weapon without it being seen by someone then it still remains a probability that they had one.
And note one of the witnesses that watched the kids in the vehicle in that lot and didn't see them dispose of anything was a police officer.
Why? Easy... they toss it in a ditch or open dumpster that initially conceals the firearm from sight. One of them is a felon on probation and a firearm alone would land them in hot water. So getting rid of it would be top priority if they had one. Period. I have no idea at this moment a potential spot they could toss a weapon at which could initially conceal it from prying eyes until friends could come grab it.
Toss it somewhere out of sight FAST in an area they know there is no witnesses or they can block the view of witnesses. Leave it there while calling for friends to get their asses over to the drop location pronto to pick up the weapon.
It makes perfect sense logically speaking. Until it can be ruled out that there was no such way the kids in the durango could have dumped a weapon without it being seen by someone then it still remains a probability that they had one.
This is exactly how lynching works. Kill someone for violating the norms of the majority/power-holder so that everyone of the minority/socially-different class knows that stepping out of line may result in death.So we go back to the beginning to see what started the whole mess to see if this tragedy could have been avoided. Fact is, Dunn never started anything. Not saying he shouldn't pay for what he did. However, the loud hip hop music was what set the series of events in motion. The loud music was the trigger. A simple considerate volume control being set and everybody goes home happy. No dying, no jailtime.
If nothing else comes of this, maybe just maybe some people will stop going out their way to piss other people off.
No, that doesn't make any sense. It would have been entirely reasonable for them to drive off and not come back. They could have gone anywhere. They didn't need to ditch the gun in the worst possible place. They drove a few hundred feet and came back. It makes no sense at all for them to do that if they had a gun and ditched it nearby. No sense at all. You are performing some ridiculous mental gymnastics to put a gun in that kid's hands. If only you gave them the same benefit of the doubt you were giving the guy who actually shot someone that night. For whatever reason it needs to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that these kids are innocent.
What's hilarious is that Dunn's own unreasonable actions are creating this doubt in your mind. He continued shooting at them so they had to flee, but then you twist that to say they fled to ditch the gun. Dunn fled and never told the police that he shot someone, so they weren't able to promptly investigate his claim of imagining he saw a gun.